What’s your call?
| 3♠ | 3NT | |||
| 4♣ | 4♦ | 4♥ | 4♠ | 4NT |
| 5♣ | 5♦ | 5♥ | 5♠ | 5NT |
| 6♣ | 6♦ | 6♥ | 6♠ | 6NT |
| 7♣ | 7♦ | 7♥ | 7♠ | 7NT |
| Dbl | Pass |
Show of support
Again, there’s a clear majority reaching for the same call.
“Raise with support,” insists Stack with 4♦. “Partner was able to bid 3♦ when vulnerable, so he must have a tremendously distributional hand, probably 5–6 or 5–7 in the minors. If this is the case, then double or 3NT will not work well. Even though there are no working high-card points, five-card support will be a great asset for partner.”
The Gordons call 3NT “too precious for us.” They bid 4♦ saying, “Wasted values aren’t worth 5♦.”
“I’m not convinced we can get plus 300 versus 3♥ doubled,” says Colchamiro, “but I am pretty sure we can make plus 130 in 4♦. If partner bids 5♦, he’ll make it. And if I bid 4♦ in tempo, I might get a crack at 4♥ doubled.”
“4♦,” bids Hampson. “We will probably beat 3♥, but plus 100 will not compensate for plus 130, and there is still potential for plus 600 in 5♦ if partner can bid it.”
“I am afraid of doubling or bidding 3NT because of their secondary spade fit,” says Cohen. “My partner rates to be void in hearts. He won’t be sorry if he raises to 5♦ with, say:
♠x x x ♥— ♦A K Q x ♣A K J x x x.”
Boehm agrees. “Too much fit to wield the axe. Besides, the opponents seem to have at least an eight-card spade fit — partner didn’t double for takeout.”
Meckstroth calls it “a very close call” between 4♦ and double. “4♦. If they were vulnerable, I would risk a double of 3♥.”
Isfeld and Henneberger raise to 4♦. “Partner’s 3♦ is a reverse. We need to cut partner some slack, so insisting on 3NT or 5♦ seems a stretch.”
Falk is one of a trio of 5♦ bidders. “3♦ was a big bid. North almost has to be 5–6. With only four diamonds, North would have tried 2NT. What is mildly weird is that the opponents should have nine spades but have not bid them. We can probably beat 3♥ two tricks, but 5♦ is cold.”
“5♦,” stretches Rigal. “Partner rates to be 2–0–5–6 with a fair hand and we won’t get rich defending.”
Meyers makes the leap, too. “I think there is a good chance that partner is void in hearts and could have six clubs and five diamonds, or else she might have competed with 2NT (with 6–4, for example).”
Walker isn’t afraid to double, “taking the sure thing. I have no idea if we can make 5♦ (or 3NT?), but I do know they can’t make 3♥.”
Sanborn goes for all the gusto. “3NT. If we have a game, this is probably where it is. It will not necessarily end the auction. Partner heard me pass last round when I could have bid 1NT.”
