In a vacuum, X looks right.
Yes my double is aggressive (I was at the actual
tournament and believe the double is wrong on the
actual hand, but so what!) but BAM calls for
aggressive doubles when the opps are vul and we rate
to make a part score. (
Only Marshall thinks pass is forcing. I think he's
simply mistaken. This auction is covered by two of
my forcing pass rules: (1) limit raises do not create
forces, and (2) if one side bids
Redouble was a 3-card spade raise.
I would double and prepare to apologize.
This time the panel was mostly of one mind. It'll be the only time in this set.
Doubling seems obvious. Finally I doubled something
and beat it. Not that it helped to win the board.
Despite it's obviousness, is it really right? If
Sometimes these decisions are just best solved using one's personality. Let's see if there is a pattern:
Nope, no correlation. And Mike, JJ, and Marshall knew the boards...and no two of them matched answers!
2/1 in favor of passing. Sort of a consensus.
There is a theory issue. Partner bid
Methods are 2-way stayman and transfers at the 3-level only.
[Many years ago, I had a similar occurrance. I was playing a
regional pairs game with someone I'd never met before. We didn't
have time to discuss methods, so when I held
Hah! A majority psychs!
Most of the panel psyched something (some passed, which I think is a psych, but most bid their short major.) Next time this comes up and the ACBL powers that be get on my case, I shall quote this result that shows that the "normal" action here is to psych.