[the hog]

"That's funny. I'd say it's a little heavy for a 3♥ jump, given it has 4 losers "

4 losers???? Looks like 5 to me. Anyway as I have often pointed out, the masterminders who open these hands with 1C get what they deserve when partner doubles the opp's contract because he thinks you have your bid.

[kenrexford]

Sooo, opener's rebid (and rebid options) aside...

It seems that there are several reasonable schools of thought:

School One -- 4♣/4♦ show "something" in the suit bid, probably a suit of at least one top honor and four cards, and a control (Axxx or Kxxx at minimum). Says nothing about a bypassed suit (i.e., 4♦ does not deny a diamond control). 3NT is just 12-14 balanced.

School Two -- 4♣/4♦ are splinters, presumably agreeing hearts with an expected 2-3 spades. Classic pattern is 3514/3541. 3NT might be 12-14 in "School 2A" or power raise of hearts (spade splinter?) in "School 2B."

School Three -- 4♣/4♦ agree hearts and are fit-jumps (concentration of values), likely short spades. 3NT is a strong heart raise without a COV.

Is this a fair statement? If not, any others to add or clarifications?

Assuming a complete set of "schools," what makes the most sense and what is most commonly used here (by competent bidders)?

It seems that some believe School One to be "expert standard." It seems to me that either School Two or School Three offers a better alternative, not sure which, but that School One is a mess. Any further thoughts?

[cnszsun]

kenrexford, on Jan 3 2007, 11:51 AM, said:

Sooo, opener's rebid (and rebid options) aside...

It seems that there are several reasonable schools of thought:

School One -- 4♣/4♦ show "something" in the suit bid, probably a suit of at least one top honor and four cards, and a control (Axxx or Kxxx at minimum).  Says nothing about a bypassed suit (i.e., 4♦ does not deny a diamond control).  3NT is just 12-14 balanced.

School Two -- 4♣/4♦ are splinters, presumably agreeing hearts with an expected 2-3 spades.  Classic pattern is 3514/3541.  3NT might be 12-14 in "School 2A" or power raise of hearts (spade splinter?) in "School 2B."

School Three -- 4♣/4♦ agree hearts and are fit-jumps (concentration of values), likely short spades.  3NT is a strong heart raise without a COV.

Is this a fair statement?  If not, any others to add or clarifications?

Assuming a complete set of "schools," what makes the most sense and what is most commonly used here (by competent bidders)?

It seems that some believe School One to be "expert standard."  It seems to me that either School Two or School Three offers a better alternative, not sure which, but that School One is a mess.  Any further thoughts?

I have some thoughts, but not sure if it's reasonable.
I believe some experts play semi-forcing 1nt, so they won't have a 12-14 balanced hand. 3nt is a free bid now.
Do you think what is more useful meaning of 3nt to show a hand with short in ♠ or to show a hand with 3♠s, 4+♥s, and a unkown minor short (partner can bid 4C to inquiry your short suit). I prefer latter. So, now 4C/4D will show values in that suit and deny 3 ♠s. For other heart raise hands, you can just bid 4♥.

[000002]

1♥ 1NT
2♥ 3NT:doubleton ♥ and 12-13Hcps,intensively NT contract

1♦ 1NT
2♦ 3NT:gambling with (Kx Kxx KJx xxxx)

1♥ 1NT
2♣ 3NT:5Cards ♣ upholding ,inferior-high-card in the whole hand

1♠ 1NT
2♦ 3NT:INTENSIVE 3nt with 5cards ♦ supporting
compare 3♥:splinter on major(♠ apparently)

1♠ 1NT
2♥ 3NT:SPLITER -- ♠?oh no!
***** when? we will sign-off 3nt with total 9cards ♥ and ♠ 0/1.

i advise this 3nt{1s-1nt,2h-3nt} show ♥ 4cards upholding and indicates 3NT. Something like:
JX
Jxxx
KJxx
AQx
and i think the singleton ♠ is NOT enough essentiality to show immediately.

i am interesting to hear the big sound ,which shout from oppositer:)

regards 000002

[inquiry]

kenrexford, on Jan 2 2007, 10:51 PM, said:

Sooo, opener's rebid (and rebid options) aside...

It seems that there are several reasonable schools of thought:

School One -- 4♣/4♦ show "something" in the suit bid, probably a suit of at least one top honor and four cards, and a control (Axxx or Kxxx at minimum). Says nothing about a bypassed suit (i.e., 4♦ does not deny a diamond control). 3NT is just 12-14 balanced.

School Two -- 4♣/4♦ are splinters, presumably agreeing hearts with an expected 2-3 spades. Classic pattern is 3514/3541. 3NT might be 12-14 in "School 2A" or power raise of hearts (spade splinter?) in "School 2B."

School Three -- 4♣/4♦ agree hearts and are fit-jumps (concentration of values), likely short spades. 3NT is a strong heart raise without a COV.

Is this a fair statement? If not, any others to add or clarifications?

Assuming a complete set of "schools," what makes the most sense and what is most commonly used here (by competent bidders)?

It seems that some believe School One to be "expert standard." It seems to me that either School Two or School Three offers a better alternative, not sure which, but that School One is a mess. Any further thoughts?

School one and three are too close to the same to worry too much about. School two is relying on a simple rule for consitency. If responder will have no more than two spades, and in the long run, frequently only one (or less), the use of 4 minor for splinter is, well, too rare to justify.

The gimmicky 3NT rebid is fine if you agree not to included balanced or strong hands in your 1NT response, but is fairly non-standard.

[Winstonm]

Jlall, on Jan 1 2007, 08:03 PM, said:

cnszsun, on Jan 1 2007, 07:56 PM, said:

I don't understand the reason why 4C is not splinter.
On other day, supposing you hold:
♠Kxx ♥A10xxx ♦Axxx ♣x. Do you think it's best to define 4C as control rather than splinter?

It is very standard among experts to define 4x as showing some kind of value in that suit. The reason is after 1S p 1N p 2H p you are already very likely to have at most 2 spades. Splinters are infrequent and not that useful. But sometimes you hav a super hand for hearts and want to bid 4x to show it.

So how do you bid this in the same auction: KJ, AQJxx, xxx, xxx?

[FrancesHinden]

Schools 1 & 3 are very similar, so much so that I would not try that hard to separate them.

School 4:
1S - 1NT
2H -

4C = huge raise to game (this sort of hand)
4D = OK raise to game, could be making slam opposite a maximum
4H = just bidding game to see what happens, please don't bid on

(I actually prefer schools 1/3 but I've seen this played)

NB: Even playing semi-forcing NT I tend to keep 3NT as natural.

[kenrexford]

I like some of these analyses. Just one concern.

I'm assuming that the 3415/3451 patterns are deemed highly unlikely (when slam is possible) because these hands would be handled through a constructive raise. That makes sense, to a degree. However, isn't 1♠-P-1NT-P-?-P-3♠ the normal method of showing a limit raise?

What do you bid, after 1♠, with say ♠Kxx ♥QJxxx ♦x ♣Kxx? If this is strong enough for a 2/1 GF (partner does not open 5332 11-counts like mine), then remove the heart Jack, or the Queen if necessary. It seems that these hands are too strong for a simple raise, even if constructive, but too weak for a 2/1 GF. (SAYC removes the problem, but this is for 2/1 GF folks).

[whereagles]

The_Hog, on Jan 3 2007, 03:04 AM, said:

"That's funny. I'd say it's a little heavy for a 3♥ jump, given it has 4 losers "

4 losers???? Looks like 5 to me.

huh..? Did someone changed the hand? I thought I had a void club and 65. With 5 losers one obviously can't open 1♣.