What’s your call?
| 2♦ | 2♥ | 2♠ | 2NT | |
| 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 |
They call him Matchpoint Meckstroth. (They do, don’t they?) “4♥. It’s probably right to play in diamonds but I’m going to risk the major at pairs.”
Cohen, too, surrenders to matchpoint greed. “4♥. At IMPs, I’d bid 5♦ , but the lure of 420 or 450 can make pigs out of us.”
Korbel: “Only in It’s Your Call do I face these problems! What fun. Let’s try 4♥. This time. Sure, we might have a slam or maybe even need to play diamonds, but I’m taking any club ruff in the short hand, which is good, and the opponents will often have a huge club fit here, so I’ll be happy to preempt them. If they compete to 5♣, I guess I’ll try 5♦ .”
Hampson leaps to 4♥. “I don’t want to allow LHO a club rebid at a low level, so I get us to game quickly.”
4♥ by Sanborn. “How can partner ever know what the right cards are? Just going with my best guess.”
Pavlicek, too. “I can’t seriously consider slam, stopping below game requires hindsight and 5♦ rates to lose matchpoints when both games make. Partner is a big favorite to be short in diamonds, given no club raise by RHO.”
Rigal’s 4♥: “They will never work out what I have, will they? My objective is to fool all three of the other players at the table. To quote Dubya: ‘Mission accomplished.’”
Weinstein’s 4♥: “Simple and practical.”
Falk 4♦ . “I’d be very unlucky not to be able to make 4♦ . As for bidding any number of hearts, I recall the late Mike Cappelletti Sr.’s axiom: ‘What do you call an eight-card suit? Trumps!’ 4♦ will reassure North that I am not worried about diamond support – I have my own – what I need are useful values outside diamonds. Meanwhile, I have to cater to, say:
♠K Q J x x ♥Q J x x x ♦ — ♣Q x x,
where partner has zero useful values, and will know it.”
Colchamiro bids 5♦ . “Isn’t there an urban legend–type rule about eightcard suits being trumps and never to be put down in the dummy?”
Meyers, 5♦ . “I’m not messing around by bidding some number of hearts.”
Lee, 5♦ : “It’s possible, but unlikely, that hearts will play well. Without a good way to involve partner, I’m just going to take a stab at our most likely game.”
Boehm issues a straightforward, natural invitation with 3♦ . “An average Michaels,
♠K J x x x ♥A x x x x ♦ x x ♣x,
leaves us well short of game after a club lead and heart switch to kill dummy’s entry. Besides, East’s failure to raise clubs suggests that partner has at most a singleton diamond, which makes hearts a poor contract. A spade shift often kills the diamond suit before trumps can be drawn.”
Stack bids 3♦ to show great diamonds and a great hand. “This might possibly enable partner to bid 3NT with a club stopper. If partner bids anything other than 3NT, then we can bid 4♥.”
Lawrence chooses a conventional 2NT. “I intend to bid diamonds next, which will be forcing. 2NT will get me a range-show bid, with 3♣ being the weakest possible hand.”
3♣ by Robinson, who goes off card. “3♣ shows hearts with a limit raise or better. 3♦ would show spades with a limit raise or better. 2♦ is non-forcing.”
