[pescetom]

---

Your call after this double explained as Penalty 10-11 HCP?

[smerriman]

Was 2♣ explained as an overcall of clubs as per the subject? Or was it Michaels as I'd expect from any robots?

[pescetom]

smerriman, on 2024-April-08, 15:48, said:

Was 2♣ explained as an overcall of clubs as per the subject? Or was it Michaels as I'd expect from any robots?

2♣ was not alerted or explained. That is consistent with a natural clubs overcall which would also be the expected treatment in this tournament.

The description of the double was almost exactly as quoted here - just some extra punctuation and a follow up comment of 11-12 total points.

[smerriman]

2♣ was described as "Overcall of clubs; 11-12 total points"? What robot was that?!

[pescetom]

smerriman, on 2024-April-09, 02:44, said:

2♣ was described as "Overcall of clubs; 11-12 total points"? What robot was that?!

Sorry, we were at cross purposes - see my now edited post above.

[smerriman]

If you're playing against an unknown system, then you wouldn't expect any logical outcome. I would assume 2♣ is Michaels, so double is looking to penalise them in at least one major, saying nothing about clubs, and pass by West should be clear-cut, though I can imagine GIB coming up with something like a 3NT bid given its poor forcing pass system in extrapolations.

[pescetom]

So what was going on (I deduce) is that GiB mistakenly assumed 2♣ must be Michaels and then ambiguously explained it as punishment without mentioning the majors.

It's ironic that I was probably the only player in the tournament who would prefer to play it as Michaels, but that possibility still never crossed my mind when an opponent bid it without alert. I guess this is another situation in which one has to doublethink GiB, like after Multi.
Pass by West would have been a minor disaster with contract making doubled, but still not as bad as 3NT was