October 2014 - 43

bidding clubs rather than diamonds
because it is difficult to correct diamonds to clubs."
Sanborn: "4♣. No good options. 3NT
could be the winner, but even if we
have a stopper, where are my tricks?"
The Sutherlins bid 4♣, calling pass,
3♠ and 3NT anti-percentage. "Many
would even call them sickos! Just make
the normal, non-newspaper bid of 4♣."
Falk is the 4♦ bidder. "Pass would be
ridiculous, so that leaves 3NT (absurd),
4♣ and 4♦. If partner is short in one
minor, it is more likely clubs; to be
short in diamonds, he needs a much
stronger hand. Meanwhile, diamonds
may survive a 4-3, and a diamond
contract is less likely to be doubled for
penalty. But clubs - not so much. This
hand is not nearly good enough for
4NT 'pick a minor,' if that's what 4NT
is - many would think it's Blackwood,
so that adds yet more risk to a bad bid. I
cannot justify going a level higher to be
sure of landing in the right minor."
Not many people know that risk is
Rigal's middle name. "This time 4NT
is clearly both minors. It's not perfect,
but what is?"
5. IMPs. None vulnerable.
♠A Q 9 8 ♥K J 10 3 ♦A Q 6 4 ♣4
West

North

East

Pass

1NT

2♦(1)

South
1♦
?

(1) Majors.
Call
Pass
Dbl

Votes
9
8

Award
100
90

On the double bubble
Another fairly evenly divided panel,
except this time, it seems everyone's
saying the same thing, just oppositely.
"Odd position," says Lawrence as he
passes. "Will partner be more likely to
bid 3♦ if I double or if I pass? I want a
chance to double two of a major, and I
hope that passing here will improve my
chances. Also, if I pass, West will be the
one to bid that major. I don't want to
double 2♦ and have East bid a major.
That would leave me on lead."

Using the same rationale, Korbel
passes. "I hope that by passing and then
doubling, partner will work out that it
should be penalty. Hopefully he does
not trip me up by bidding clubs first.
Doubling here would show longer diamonds and invite partner to compete."
Hampson, too: "I don't want partner
to feel tempted to raise diamonds, so I
will pass, then double."
Stack passes. "A double in this position should show length in diamonds
and willingness to compete there. It
should not show that we are loaded in
the majors and wish to punish them.
We will pass for now and double their
major to try to show this type of hand."
Lee sees no good alternative to passing. Meyers and Meckstroth are also of
the "pass first, double subsequently"
persuasion.
Weinstein passes. "I want to defend
two of a major, and I think pass then
double is penalty. Some would take a
double of 2♦ as looking to penalize.
I would take it as a hand on which I
wanted to bid 2♦."
The Sutherlins: "Double, double,

the opponents are in trouble!" (OK, so
the meter's a little off.) "Our double of
2♦ says we have extras and interest
in defending two of a major. We will be
able to make a penalty double of East's
major-suit bid."
Sanborn doubles. "Double then
double should be penalty. Pass then
double is more optional."
Rigal doubles. "Pass and then double
sounds like takeout, and not this hand.
But if my partner told me that my double was clearly long diamonds, I might
not be able to argue with him. Who am
I kidding? I can argue with anyone."
"Double," thunders Boehm. "Don't let
them off the hook."
Robinson's double translates: "Either
I want to punish them or it shows long
diamonds. I hope partner will let me
show which I have."
Double by Colchamiro, "for a hundred obvious reasons."
Double by Cohen. "Whatever it
means."
And on that note, we're done for the
month. You can open your eyes now,
Jill.

Please participate in It's Your Call. Go to www.acbl.org and click on It's Your Call under the My ACBL Login tab at the top. You may submit answers for a given month until
midnight on the 20th of that month, at which point the next month's problems will be
available. The top scores for August are:
William L. Adams Jr., Lexington KY
Barry Bragin, Silver Spring MD
Christopher S. Gibson, Beaverton OR
Rob Gordon, Northport NY
Garry P. Hoden, Eagan MN
Jordan Kaye, West Bloomfield MI
Aaron H. Mohrman, Seattle WA
Philip A. Sugar, New York NY
Shawn V. Tate, Ft. Leonard Wood MO
Jay D. Anderson, Saskatoon SK
Wendel Archer, Nashville TN
Debbie L. Benner, Fairfield CT
V. Everett Boyer, San Diego CA
Nell B. Cahn, Shreveport LA
Joe Cameron, Frisco TX
Corey S. Cole, Oakhurst CA
Dominic L. Connolly, England
Joe W. Crim, Athens GA
Michael Dimich, Burnaby BC
Liang Fan, Los Angeles CA
Steven C. Handley, Edmonds WA
Woody Haynes, Chicago IL

500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490

Paul Hazzard, Marion IA
Leonard K. Helfgott, Teaneck NJ
Oliver M. Hoffmann, New Zealand
Winston Huang, Los Altos CA
Craig L. Huneke, Charlottesville VA
Dianne E. Isfeld, Coquitlam BC
James M. Kenny, Emmous PA
Ren M. Klatt, Sarnia ON
Ming-Xiang Li, Fremont CA
Barbara F. Lilly, Boone IA
Andrew Loh, Solana Beach CA
Denis V. Murphy, Coldbrook NS
Michael G. Perkons, Denville NJ
Harold Rosenson, Highland Park IL
Rammohan Sarangan, Arlington VA
Stephen F. Sturm, Fullerton CA
Xu Wang, Rego Park NY
Keith Wells, Memphis TN
Donald E. Wertheimer, South Bend IN
Alan D. Wolff, Pittsfield NH
Sandra L. Wong, Markham ON
Cheng-Hung Yeh, Diamond Bar CA

490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490

October 2014 Bridge Bulletin

43
http://www.acbl.or
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of October 2014
