[thorvald]

---

Perhaps it was better to bid 2♦ on the first turn.

Now selling out to 2♥ just looks wrong, so what to bid?

My opponent bid 2♠ (Showing 4+♠ and 10-16 points)

I choose to double leading to this result

---

I am not sure it is right to defined 3♠ as forcing, but I did not dare to pass

Against 4♠ lead a ♦ and got the ruff. Against 2♠, the East bot hoped for tricks in other suits, so no ruff

[pescetom]

I don't think it should be forcing and I don't think it need be 5 cards like the description says (nor apparently does GIB).

[thorvald]

pescetom, on 2022-September-08, 06:20, said:

I don't think it should be forcing and I don't think it need be 5 cards like the description says (nor apparently does GIB).

I think it should be descibed as 4-5 ♠, Invitational, but GIB is more working in absolute values, like total points, so invitational isn't really an option

[pescetom]

thorvald, on 2022-September-08, 09:47, said:

I think it should be descibed as 4-5 ♠, Invitational, but GIB is more working in absolute values, like total points, so invitational isn't really an option

Certainly 4+ spades.
I'm in favour of absolute values here rather than judgement, but the situation is complicated by the late double rather than at first opportunity.

[smerriman]

pescetom, on 2022-September-08, 11:42, said:

but the situation is complicated by the late double rather than at first opportunity.

That's the problem here, and is a classic GIB issue. It first pass can't be programmed to deny values (since there are plenty of hands with values that have to pass), and it doesn't have any specific rules for 'double when you could have doubled earlier'. So it assumes it is unconstrained and it's a standard takeout double.

[cherdano]

Of course a hand with 5+spades and 10+points would have made a 1♠ overcall, so the description here is just non-sense. I think it's a clear pass of 3♠.