What’s your call?
| 4♠ | 4NT | |||
| 5♣ | 5♦ | 5♥ | 5♠ | 5NT |
| 6♣ | 6♦ | 6♥ | 6♠ | 6NT |
| 7♣ | 7♦ | 7♥ | 7♠ | 7NT |
| Pass | Dbl |
Meckstroth doubles. “This gives us a chance to defend 4♥ and also get to spades if we belong there.”
Ditto Robinson. “If partner bids 5♣, I can bid 5♦ . If he bids 4♠ or pass, that could be OK, too.”
And Korbel: “Too much to pass.”
And Meyers: “I wish I had another spade.”
And Weinstein: “Glad my minor is diamonds, not clubs!”
And Stack: “If partner bids 4♠, let’s gut it out. If 5♣ emerges, then we are out to 5♦ . If partner passes and they make it, then that’s another great hand for discussion at the bar.”
Lee’s reasoning is similar. “Double seems clear – keeping everything in the picture.”
Seven panelists don’t think it’s clear at all.
Lawrence overcalls 5♦ . “I reject double because I won’t know what to do if partner bids 4♠, and I for sure won’t know what to do if they bid 5♥.”
Rigal, too. “Could backfire so spectacularly that this could be the idiocy I referred to in the previous problem.
But double just doesn’t cut it and pass … not for me.”
Boehm counters with a question of his own. “If I double and convert 5♣ to 5♦ , won’t partner correct to 5♠ holding 3–2 in the pointed suits – since my sequence will have implied two places to play?”
Kennedy bids 5♦ and sighs, “It’s difficult to find a perfect spot at such a high level.”
Smart-alecky Cohen has us all figured out: “5♦ . If my diamonds were better, you wouldn’t be posing this problem.
Falk exits with a pass. “5♦ is too rich for my blood, and a takeout double is too absurd for my taste.”
