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 |
It’s OK to issue an invitation with the last hand, but then put the brakes on with this one? Unlike Problem 1, here you’re assured of at least a seven-card club fit. Is there a seven- or possibly eight-card heart fit, maybe even a heart game? You may well never know.
3♣ by Colchamiro, who offers this guidance: “Long ago, I learned to value my hand opposite a known two-suiter by 1) the number of cards I have in partner’s long suits and 2) the percentage of high-card points in partner’s suits. Here, it’s 2/13 and 4/16, so I go low despite three outside tricks. At favorable vulnerability, partner could have a relative piece of trash such as:
♠x x ♥— ♦ K J 10 x x x ♣K x x x x.”
Meyers bids 3♣. “Partner has the minors. I am not introducing a major. Basic rule: When you don’t have a fit, stay low.”
“Nice going, partner,” Cohen sighs. He bids 3♣. “So far, this is misfit month.”
Weinstein notes, “No game is likely,” and cuts and pastes his answer to the first problem. “I am going low because of the misfit and looking for the most likely plus score.”
Lee likes 3♣. “Strange hand, but if partner has a weak 6–5 or 6–6, this is quite likely the last making contract assuming a trump lead.”
Boehm echoes Lee’s sentiments and adds, “If West psyched, more power to him.”
Sanborn finds the opponents convincing. “3♣. I don’t think the vulnerable opponents are fooling around, so partner must be very weak with at least 11 minor-suit cards. I can’t envision any game for us.”
Robinson: “3♣. Hopefully partner is 5–6 in the minors.”
Hampson, too: “Lots of points in this deck. Hopefully partner is bidding on extra shape rather than a good hand.”
Lawrence, 3♣: “Best partial available. A good defender will lead trump, which won’t help my chances. 3♥ is a modest second choice.”
Stack, 3♣, wondering: “Have you ever had so many high-card points with partner forcing our side to the three level? What a choice! Let’s try for a plus score rather than passing or bidding 3♥. Partner has asked us to bid a minor and we certainly have a preference.”
The Sutherlins bid 3♣. “Perhaps we have enough cards to play in game, but we have transportation problems and no fit. Our club support is probably better for partner than his heart support for us. Going plus in 3♣ can be a big winner.”
Meckstroth takes a shot at 3NT. “At IMPs I will try for the game bonus.”
Falk is a 3NT bidder, too. “A complete crapshoot. This would be a much better bid if partner were going to be dummy. Even at favorable vulnerability, partner needs a reason to get into the bidding. He has to have a reason to think that we may have a profitable sacrifice at the five level if I fit one minor. So partner is not going to have Q–J–x–x–x in one minor and Q–J–x–x–x–x in the other, or even Q–J–x–x–x–x in both minors. That would give too much information away to the opponents. I’m hoping to run some club tricks and find another trick somewhere to bring us to nine.”
Undaunted by the misfit, Rigal bids 3♥, natural and forcing. “I don’t see how we can do less than this. My idea of a 2NT overcall means that 5♣ will have play most of the time (for down 500).”
