What’s your call?
| 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 |
| Dbl | Pass |
I ♥ my hand this much
Everyone’s pulling heart cards out of their bidding boxes (no surprise), but there’s a big difference of opinion as to how many hearts to bid.
Meckstroth bids 3♥ “trying to get to game at IMPs.”
Hampson describes his hand as being weak on HCP but very offensive.
“I want to include partner in the decision about game versus a partial. I think the jump to 3♥ should get that message across.”
Rigal’s sending the same message. “There will surely be more bidding, so I don’t want to give partner the idea I have a great hand when, in fact, I’ve no idea who can make what. 4♥ should be even more shape and fewer HCP (a 6–5 10–11 count, maybe). A jump to 4♣/4♦ or a cuebid deals with all the really good hands.”
Cohen calls 3♥ a stretch even as he makes the bid. “I love my distribution. This is not a game-forcing jump shift; this is like invitationally raising partner’s implied hearts.”
Walker thinks her 3♥ bid looks like an overbid: “I have only 9 working HCP. But it’s worth it to take the three level away from left-hand opponent.”
Meyers dials it down a notch. “2♥,” she says. “Not quite good enough for 3♥, although the fifth heart is a pretty card.”
“2♥,” the Gordons shrug. “We don’t understand the problem.”
“There is no compelling reason to bid anything other than 2♥,” says Stack. “This is a very minimum hand with the only outstanding feature being the fifth heart.”
“We think 2♥ is enough,” the Joyces agree. “Partner will raise when we have a game.”
Sanborn bids 2♥ with what she terms “a minimum hand, even with a fifth heart. Clearly I will compete to the three level if necessary.”
Lawrence is among the conservative 2♥ bidders. “This hand has improved a lot, but it is very thin with a likely wasted ♦Q. Either you stretch to 3♥ or you choose a quiet 2♥. No points for 4♥ — just too big a reach. With no one vulnerable, 3♥ has less to gain than if we were vulnerable.”
Needless to say, the 4♥ bidders disagree.
“4♥,” challenges Robinson. “Bid what I think I can make.”
“No reason to invite,” insist the Sutherlins. “There are many 6–7 point hands (two red kings, e.g.) that partner can hold that will give us a good play for game. North should have more good hands than bad for us.”
Colchamiro reaches deep into the bid box for his 4♥ call. “Opposite an ace and a king, I can make 4♥. Besides, who knows what they can make? This would be more difficult at matchpoints where going minus could be terrible.”