GRR. 2H edged out 2S, 8 to 7 among panelists, and got 80 points (in part A, Yes won overwhelmingly) Moderator’s comments: https://files.constantcontact.com/2bd6acd1101/8938c288-d46f-4680-b8c2-c06bb389ff03.pdf?rdr=true
Seems like an obvious double, but maybe at matchpoints it isn’t so obvious, We likely have a game and would have to beat it 4 if we do. And is there any possibility a double is takeout?
moderator’s comments: https://files.constantcontact.com/2bd6acd1101/2ff4caf1-ace7-4ba3-bc26-c7e8a2ebd7eb.pdf?rdr=true
Problem set: February 2026
Respondent: Steve White (D4)
--------------------------------------------------------
Problem A
Steve White: Two notrump. Trying to right side our hearts. Neither 3D nor 3H is clearly better, so let’s try this
Missed the stated deadline. Perhaps I should be hoping I’m too late to be quoted
Should have gone with my original 3H choice. It got 100, chosen by 8 of 15 panelists and 6 of 24 solvers. 2N got 80, chosen by no panelists and 3 solvers. My answer did get quoted.
Link to moderator’s scoring and commentary: https://files.constantcontact.com/2bd6acd1101/19bec7ca-ad9a-4608-9439-10ac8deba6f5.pdf?rdr=true
Who can guess how many we can make, not knowing partner’s overall strength, his spades, or if he can help hearts. 3S seems like a good choice.
Vul at imps, I think we have to take a shot at game. Best to start with 2C and get more info about partner’s hand. In addition to 4S, 4H or a slam could be the final contract
3S was the only bid to get 50 on part A, with 7 of 15 panelists and 7 of 18 solvers, a plurality in each group, with nothing else getting more than 3 panelists.
Part B was much closer. 2C (3 panelists), 4C (2) and 4S (3) each got 50. Collectively they were viewed as “game forcing, either agreeing spades or noncommittal about trumps”. As a specific choice, 3S had 4 panelists, but got 40 points. Seems reasonable, especially since I was in the 50-point consortium.
Link to scoring and moderator’s comments https://files.constantcontact.com/2bd6acd1101/495417e9-6a75-4b89-b7d1-1e7894ed5ddb.pdf?rdr=true
