[mikeh]

[quote name='Codo' date='Apr 25 2006, 08:10 AM']..but nothing minimizes the trump length issue if partner lacks the queen. [/QUOTE]

There are tools to avoid this dilemma, like RKCB. As Partner is lacking at least three Key cards, he surely won`t bid 4 NT with his hand too often.
So, with AJxxxx, Kxx,Axx,x, or better, he may bid 4 NT, but even then, the Grand has some play.
And with AJxxx,Kxx,Ax,xx, or worse, he will bid 4 Heart or 4 Spade and you can ask him about his KCs and later place the contract.[/QUOTE]
This is simply untrue.

After the splinter, it will usually be partner who is using keycard and he will expect 4 card support so with Axxxxx he will not care about the missing queen.

And if he bids 4[he] over your splinter, and you keycard, a good partner will show the queen with Axxxxx, because he expects 4 card support and therfore has the 'extra length' that allows him to show the Queen when he does not hold it.

And as for whereagles' comment that grands are rare and (presumably) one should not worry about them, well: hands like the one opener is looking at are 'rare' as well. Good players bid good grands: it is one of the characteristics that mark good players. Partner needs only AQJxxx xxx Axx x for grand to be ok, and give him an extra [cl] and it is a great grand. But with a splinter, he may think he needs less: say Axxxxx Kx Ax Jxx... this is 'more' in a way, but far 'less' in terms of making the grand a good spot. With this hand he would keycard over the splinter and then bid 5N, announcing all the keycards, not worried about the Queen, and opener has to bid 7 with that [cl] suit.

[whereagles]

mikeh: well, I'm not going to argue that a splinter might drive to a bad grand slam on rare occasions, but I still fail to see how bidding 3♦ is going to solve all your problems.

If this situation happened to me at table, I'd already be extremely happy to be in 4 when it's right and in 6 when it's right. Avoiding a descriptive splinter, which will work fine on most hands, just because it might lead to a bad grand on 1-2% of the cases doesn't seem like a good deal to me.

[Codo]

Hi mikeh,

we all agree, that no bid is perfect. Else, why should someone raise the question, what to bid?
But if the only downside of the splinter is, that PD may show me the queen of spades, because he has 6 cards in this suit or that he may send us to a grand because he asked us about KCs and thinks, he can find the queen in his 10 card fit, I can live with it.
At least much better then with a 3 Diamond bid, followed by 3 NT, after which the supporters of this style bid 4 Heart- "this shows my hand", "of course": 4 Diamond or" I don`t understand 4 Diamond" ,my bid is 4 Club and will struggle even to find a small slam.

[zasanya]

The objection to splinter seems to be P expects 4 cards in ♠ which means you can splinter with 4 rags or Jxxx but not with K x x.
Strange.

[Kalvan14]

mikeh, on Apr 24 2006, 01:29 PM, said:

I earlier voted for 3♦, and I disagree with any suggestion that this bid introduces any real ambiguity. Sure, 3♦ does not yet show the ♠ fit, but any bid (other than 4N or 5♣ etc) over 3N sure does! And I am NOT passing 3N... who would?

The main downside of 3♦, which no-one mentioned, was that you may have trouble after a 3♠ continuation: a bid by partner that is void of any positive information: but contains some useful negative information: he lacks a ♦ stopper. That in turn makes slam in ♠ more likely, even tho 3♠ showed nothing extra, the fact that he lacks minor suit cards and the ♠K suggests a slam suitable hand: no partner of mine would have bid 2♠ with AJxxx Qxx xxx xx for example.

I will not go into my choice after 3♠, since the question supposes a 3N bid.

Any bid by me is now slammish: even 4♠ is a slam try, since I did not bid either 3 or 4♠ last time, but cue first.

I also think that 4♥ is a slam try in support of ♠: with any 5=6 round suit hand, I would never cue: I would have bid a forcing 3♥.

But I don't like 4♥: it prevents partner from bidding 4♦, which would leave me an easy keycard.

So I choose 4♣: aware that I may be committing the cardinal and frequent sin of claiming that my bid shows my hand when in reality it shows something else: self-sufficient ♣ and no interest in 3N: I don't think I'd bid that way with Kx Ax xx AKQJxxx for example: I'd raise 3N to 4N.

So I do think that 4♣, on this sequence, should 'convert' the initially ambiguous 3♦ into a cue in support of ♠.


As for splintering: this is ok if you play last train: since partner bid 4♥ over 4♦. If you do not play last train, you are going to be guessing after the likely 4♠.

Having said all that, I really don't think that this is clear one way or the other: my suspicion is that a good partnership will reach the best spot (most of the time) whether one chose 3 or 4♦

Well said, Mikeh.
I also choose 3♦, and 4♣ afterwards (which implies a spade fit).

The advantage of 3♦ over 4♦ is that you find is pard has wasted values in diamonds, and stopping in 4♠ is easier (and you do not give the message of a 4-card fit in spades).

If pard rebids 3♠, so much the better: time for RKC has finally come.