What’s your call?
| 3♦ | 3♥ | 3♠ | 3NT | |
| 4♣ | 4♦ | 4♥ | 4♠ | 4NT |
| 5♣ | 5♦ | 5♥ | 5♠ | 5NT |
| 6♣ | 6♦ | 6♥ | 6♠ | 6NT |
| 7♣ | 7♦ | 7♥ | 7♠ | 7NT |
| Pass | Dbl |
Lawrence emerges from his funk, all sunshine and hearts. “I am bidding 3♥ because on this hand, I can expect us to have a game. And it is reasonable that we will find it, unlike the previous hand. With modest luck, partner will have three or four (or five!) hearts and can bid 4♥. I am showing a good hand with this sequence.”
3♥ by Meckstroth, “hoping we have a game here.”
Lee bids 3♥. “It’s tempting to take the sure plus, but I think 3♥ will usually make, and we don’t need much for game. Opposite a 4–4–4–1 yarborough, we are almost cold for 4♥.”
3♥ by Cohen, who says that because partner will surely bid spades, it’s a waste of time to double. “I am afraid to settle for 50 a trick when we could have a heart game opposite zero points:
♠x x x x x ♥x x x x ♦ x x x ♣x.”
Korbel: “Partner has a very weak hand. We expect him to have at most one club and at least five spades, and he didn’t bid over 3♣. It’s easy to see how we can make 4♥ opposite something such as this:
♠x x x x x ♥J 10 x x ♦ x x x ♣x.
It’s not unreasonable at all to pass 3♣ here. I certainly would if we were nonvulnerable and they were vulnerable.”
Colchamiro agrees on 3♥, but says, “I am close to a pass because partner almost certainly has five or more spades and therefore not much. Even if he has something like:
♠x x x x x x ♥x x ♦ K x x x ♣x,
we might just scramble 10 tricks in hearts, maybe even after a trump lead. So our upside for bidding is 7 IMPs (plus 420 instead of plus 150 if we pass), and our downside is at most, lose 5 or 6 (minus 100 in 3♥ or 4♥ vs. plus 150 defending 3♣).”
Weinstein’s call is 3♥. “Because my suit is so bad, I want to bid 3NT. But doubling 1♣ and then bidding 3NT should show a more flexible hand for the majors. The most likely way to get to 3NT is to bid 3♥ now and then bid 3NT over partner’s 3♠. If partner raises hearts, that’s hopefully where we belong.”
There are two intrepid doublers: Stack and the Sutherlins.
Stack, who has a lot of “must bid” in his vocabulary this month, says, “Partner will, of course, be short in clubs, so 3♥ may not be enough. 4♥ may be too much with this modest suit. So after the double, I’ll bid 3♥ if partner bids 3♦ . Over 3♥, I’ll raise to four. Over 3♠, I’ll bid 4♥. Over a jump to 4♠, I’ll gut out a pass.”
“Partner may have hearts,” say the Sutherlins. “Over 3♠, we’ll bid 3NT. If partner jumps to 4♠, he should have a reasonable six-card suit.”
“Pass?” queries Hampson. “I think we might make game in notrump or a red suit, but partner is already marked with long spades and club shortness and didn’t bid, so he seems quite weak. If I don’t find a heart fit or get back to diamonds if partner is 5=2=5=1, then we will go minus instead of plus. We could go plus 250 defending 3♣, which gets us most of our game bonus.”
Torn between 3♥ and 3NT, Meyers is going for the notrump game.
Robinson boldly leaps to the heart game. “I hope to make 4♥ opposite 5=3=4=1 nothing. If I double, partner will bid spades since he has at least five of them.”
