What’s your call?
| 3♣ | 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 |
We could back up and debate the 2♦ call, but what’s done is done. Teetering on the dangerous upper edge of the two level, most of the panelists pass.
“Don’t like it,” says Rigal, “can’t think of anything better.” Barry always finds the silver lining, however: “They haven’t doubled yet.”
“Pass,” says Hampson emphatically. “I have no certain fit. My hand is weak for this bidding so I get out now.”
Pass by Meyers. “Partner could have a stiff diamond. I don’t want to bid 3♦ – my spots aren’t good enough. Also, partner is likely to have six clubs and the ♣J is probably a working card.”
Pass by Cohen, “just as I would have done over 2♣. I doubt we will take exactly eight tricks in notrump, but why turn a likely small minus into a potential minus 800 by bidding again?”
Pass by Korbel. “This won’t make, but at least the doubling hasn’t started yet.”
Pass by Kennedy. “With no fit in partner’s suit, I don’t see how I can bid any further.”
Falk, too: “For 3NT to have play, partner had to be way too good to just overcall 2♣. 2NT does not promise a diamond fit. What would North do with:
♠K x x ♥A Q x ♦ x ♣A K x x x x?
We’re going down like dogs in 2NT,but they have not yet started doubling. Even if North held that hand plus the ♠10, we might make 2NT, but 3NT is beyond reach.”
“We are a passed hand,” state the Sutherlins (interesting syntax), “so 2♦ – which should show 8–10 points and six diamonds – was not game forcing. We have a minimum, so let’s decline the invitational 2NT. We are probably going minus.”
Colchamiro is on the same page. “2♦ was doubtful the first time and it looks like partner has spade length. No double, no trouble.”
Pass by Sanborn. “One level lower and not doubled. I have no safety in bidding 3♦ , especially with those spots.”
Stack passes. “If this is a 3NT hand, then partner should have bid it. The only other possible bid is a correction of 2NT to 3♦ . The diamond suit is poor, however, and we have a few useful cards to help in the struggle that’s 2NT.”
Robinson, on the other hand, bids 3♦ . “I don’t think we have a game, so I’ll play in my long suit. Partner is allowed to have some diamonds.”
Boehm’s 3♦ : “I view 2NT as forward-going, not corrective, hence likely to include diamond tolerance.”
That’s Lee’s view, too. “If partner has diamond shortness, I likely should have passed 2NT. But I will take our best chance at a plus when partner has two diamonds and a fair hand.”
3♦ by Meckstroth: “Doesn’t look good for notrump.”
Rather than fretting and bidding backwards, Lawrence throws caution to the wind. “3NT. Might make. Might be down a lot. 2NT might be down a lot, too.”
