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 |
Almost half of the panelists reach for the double card. They’re not necessarily sure what it means, but at least it’s flexible.
For example, here’s Colchamiro: “Double. Whatever it means.”
And the Sutherlins: “There is no good suit or notrump bid to describe this hand. We are left with double, which gives us the best chance to reach the right spot.”
Abdou elaborates. “Anything could be right – 3♥, 3NT – but I will take the money and, who knows? Maybe 800. People go crazy at favorable vulnerability. I may not make a game with my finesses not likely to be on, and partner may still bid with extra shape.”
Falk doubles to show a hand too strong for 3♥. “The hearts are awful anyway, and it’s certainly not right to bid 4♥. Double shows mucho extras and invites partner to do something intelligent.”
Boehm likes double “whether it’s penalty or it shows general values. Just as long as it isn’t a support double!”
Lawrence doubles. “For penalty. Glad I am in the comfort of my own room so no one can see my uncertainty. I generally don’t play double as support here. Ugly problem.”
Sanborn agrees. “Double. No bid is perfect and the vulnerability points to offense. The only other choice is 4♥, and that just doesn’t look right.”
Korbel chooses 3NT. “It doesn’t feel right to make an action double with this hand. Although I’d like to give partner a choice between hearts and notrump, I feel that notrump will do well enough in the long run to be the best option.”
3NT by Stack, too, as he dismisses the alternatives. “We could double and take what is sure to be a plus score, but would it compensate for what is surely a vulnerable game for our side? 3♥ would be nice if it were forcing, but it is not. And a jump to 4♥ with this suit cannot be right. The notrump game figures to be correct for several reasons. As little as the ♣J – which probably yields two stoppers – and the ♥J – which probably guarantees five heart tricks – from partner gives game a great play.”
Rigal shrugs. “3NT. I’ve no idea what to do. Double tends to be extras and shortish clubs, so that is out. No way to bid the hand sensibly, but this is my best guess.”
3NT by Lee. “3♥ seems like an underbid and 4♥ is too committal.”
Hampson, too, bids 3NT. “This seems like the most likely game to make – and may even make some of the time when partner was passing 3♥.”
3NT by Meyers: “I have enough values to bid a game and no other way to express it.”
Robinson is just fine jumping to 4♥. “I can’t think of a better bid. I’m not sure what 4♣ would do. I could bid 3♦ , but what would that accomplish? 3NT would need heart help, so might as well play in hearts.”
