[whereagles]

jtfanclub, on Nov 28 2007, 04:06 PM, said:

I also find JTxx is a lot less valuable across a 5 card suit than a 4 card suit, but I'm sure that's just me.

It's not. There are many versions of precision with bids asking for the J of a 4-card suit.

[ArtK78]

This hand is a classic invitational to game splinter bid (mini-splinter).

For anyone who is interested, here is a structure which allows one to use mini-splinters, regular splinters, maxi-splinters, Jacoby 2NT and Bergen Raises over a 1♠ opening:

2NT response - spade raise, invitational or better, to be defined by rebid.
-3♣ Opener is required to relay (the partnership can define hand types that permit opener to bid something other than 3♣)
---3♦ Mini-splinter with short diamonds
---3♥ Mini-splinter with short hearts
---3♠ Mini-splinter with short clubs
---3NT Balanced strong notrump with 3 card spade support
---4♣ Maxi-splinter (stronger than regular splinter) with short clubs
---4♦ Maxi-splinter with short diamonds
---4♥ Maxi-splinter with short hearts
---4♠ Balanced strong notrump with 4 or 5 card spade support

3♣ response - Jacoby "2NT". Opener bids 3♦ with shortness in either minor, 3♥ with shortness in hearts, and bids of 3♠ and higher can be whatever the partnership wants them to be. Over opener's 3♦, responder can bid 3♥ to find out which minor is opener's short minor.

3♦ response - Bergen mixed raise.
3♥ response - Bergen limit raise.

The partnership can reverse the meanings of the 3♦ and 3♥ responses if it chooses to do so.

4♣, 4♦ and 4♥ responses - normal game forcing splinter raises, limited by the use of maxi-splinters.

I have a structure that allows all of these over a 1♥ opening as well, along with some other interesting things.

[skjaeran]

This hand isn't a GF for me. With the OP agreements I think 3♦ is clear, and it's what I'd bid with one of my partners.

Playing with my main partner I'd bid 3♣, showing a mini-splinter in one of the minors (partner can relay with 3♦). We've put both the Bergen raises together in the 3♦ response to 1♠ (with 3♦ relay). Obviously this isn't perfect, but we find the mini-splinters to be more effective than Bergen raises when holding s singleton and amalgameted the two approaches to be able to play 2NT as GF and 3M as preemtive. 3♥ is a mini-splinter.

Over 1♥ we play 2♠ as any mini-splinter (2NT=relay) and 3m=Bergen raises.

[mike777]

Got permission to post this cute email response to this quiz.


"3D (limit raise). I have 4 covers. Partner should aggressively accept.

This is what we call, down here(Texas), a “Merri-jo Hillaker” hand. She will then go ahead and bid game after her partner’s signoff because she HATES to miss a making game, especially at IMP’s.



Since partner should bid game with any 6 loser hand, you should accept his judgment. If you have a point-counter for a partner, then you should bid game anyway, like MJ does (she is a little more conservative at MP but not much).



If the hand were JTxx,AKxxx,xxx,x, I would bid game after the signoff, too."

[han]

jdonn, on Nov 27 2007, 08:15 PM, said:

3♦, I would like to believe this answer is impossible to disagree with in these methods?

Agree with jdown.

[kenrexford]

One of my bridge friends has convinced me to use "limix" raises.

The idea is that the "mixed" Bergen (we use one-under rather than 3♣ or Reverse 3♦) is dumb. Make a simple raise with that hand and enable game tries. The one-under, then, is a "limix" raise, showing a hand that values up to a limit raise because of shape. This will typically also guarantee two tricks plus a stiff. Perfect here. If you do this, a stiff-ask probably makes some sense.

Not using this?

OK. Then, I usually do something that frustrates partner with this type of hand. I'll keep the various versions to myself other than to hint at it -- masterminding. A sickness, uncontrollable in this type of situation. Something funny, perhaps.