[stjk]

IMP team match, non Vul:

Kxxx KQx A AKxxx

you LHO pard RHO
1C Pass 1S Pass
?

Will you bid 4D (SPLINTER) or 4S or something else?

IF you bid 4D and pard bid 4H, will you RKC?

Thanks,

[Walddk]

Yes, I would splinter, but my (mini)splinter would be 3♦ (singleton) and not necessarily game-forcing. 4♦ would be a void for me. If 4♦ is all you have available, then yes, I would bid RKCB over 4♥.

Roland

[whereagles]

I don't like splinters with singleton honors, so I'd try 4♣ if I play that's good clubs + spade fit.

If not, I prefer a straight 4♠, which normally is something like 18-19 balanced, close to what I have.

[kenrexford]

I have about a four-loser hand, meaning that I have slam aspirations if partner has three of the critical cards. I am not interested in the diamond King, because it does not help anything. Change my hearts to AKx or something like that, and I would be. So, the splinter seems to work well with this specific holding.

If partner has the right hand, meaning three of the critical cards (A-Q in trumps, club Q, and heart A) he will at least reciprocate.

4♦ for me.

[mike777]

stjk, on Oct 30 2008, 02:03 PM, said:

IMP team match, non Vul:

Kxxx KQx A AKxxx

you LHO pard RHO
1C Pass 1S Pass
?

Will you bid 4D (SPLINTER) or 4S or something else?

IF you bid 4D and pard bid 4H, will you RKC?

Thanks,

4s

[mikeh]

This must be close to Halloween, because I find myself agreeing with ken. Well, not entirely... I don't think that changing my hearts to AKx would have any effect other than to make me even happier than I am now

[kenrexford]

mikeh, on Oct 30 2008, 02:49 PM, said:

This must be close to Halloween, because I find myself agreeing with ken. Well, not entirely... I don't think that changing my hearts to AKx would have any effect other than to make me even happier than I am now

My disciple...

You see, what I meant was to change the hearts to AKx and to change the rest of the hand to compensate. That's two more points. So, maybe ♠Kxxx ♥AKx ♦A ♣KQxxx?

If you get frightened by any of these toughies, Mike, never be afraid to ask me. I'll lead you in the right direction.

[Walddk]

To those of you who bid 4♦ (Mike and Ken so far) what is 3♦ in your methods?

Roland

[keylime]

Roland,

I treat 3D as shape showing specifically, whenever I get the chance of playing 2/1 (rare these days).

I voted for 4♦ as well, because if pard makes any noise other than 4S, I'm going for the big dance.

[Walddk]

keylime, on Oct 30 2008, 10:07 PM, said:

Roland,

I treat 3D as shape showing specifically, whenever I get the chance of playing 2/1 (rare these days).

I don't get it; what shape? A fragment, 4-1-3-5 (indeed playable), or ...? What would 3♥ be, 4-3-1-5?

Roland

[keylime]

Basically a fragment style raise, since 2D is a natural reverse.

[Hanoi5]

Not a good idea splintering with singleton honors.

[mikeh]

Walddk, on Oct 30 2008, 03:05 PM, said:

To those of you who bid 4♦ (Mike and Ken so far) what is 3♦ in your methods?

Roland

Well, the truth be told that I like it as a game invitational or better splinter in diamonds... and in my favourite partnerships, I so play it. In fact, I also play 4♦ and 4♣ both as 4=6 equivalents, with 4♣ being a very, very strong hand and 4♦ not so strong . 4♣ announces strong slam aspirations with very good blacks, while 4♦ says I want to play game... I expect it to have play.. but you are going to need a good hand for slam.

So really, I suppose, I don't agree with Ken.... but his post struck me as unexpectedly normal, so I agreed with him

And I confess that with some players (at a saturday night social, we have a wide range of skill/knowledge from intermediate to world class... and a lot of wine helps to even the field) I would bid 4♦ rather than risk the complications that would ensue with some of them if I chose 3♦. Edit: to clarify, I had a similar auction with a player who would, I suspect, id himself as expert on BBO, and whom I would regard as advanced in real life... he jumped to 3♥ after I responded 1♠ to his 1♦ opening. The bidding became confused thereafter, en route to 7♠... he held a very good 2=5=6=0.... I would have made the contract if trump had been 3-2.

But, with an expert, 3♦ is clearly best even without the prior agreement that it is invitational plus... after all, we are definitely bidding again over 3♠.

[fred]

mikeh, on Oct 30 2008, 10:01 PM, said:

But, with an expert, 3♦ is clearly best even without the prior agreement that it is invitational plus... after all, we are definitely bidding again over 3♠.

Mike,

I don't understand how the "invitiational plus" splinter can possibly work without some pretty serious artificiality to sort out opener's range.

For example, what is responder supposed to do if he wants to play game opposite an invitational hand? Bid game I assume. Then if opener has a strong splinter, how is he supposed to know if he should bid again?

Maybe responder is supposed to cuebid something (if he has something to cuebid) with a hand that could produce slam opposite a big splinter? If so then I assume that opener would always sign off if he had the invitational hand. But that will cause problems for responder if he is strong enough to be interested in slam even if opener has only invitational values.

Feels like the same problem that is basically impossible to solve without some serious hoop-jumping when you play that cuebid of overcall is "limit raise or better".

Am I missing something?

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[kenrexford]

3♦ works if that tool is available. A jump reverse is clearly best as a splinter unless there is another meaning associated with the call. My preference, however, is for a jump reverse like this to show three-card support for Responder's major and a great 6-card minor. If two jump reverses are possible, then the one chosen is either the longer or the shorter, depending on style/preference.

So, tweak the hand to ♠KQx ♥KQx ♦x ♣AKJxxx, and this is a 3♦ (or 3♥) jump reverse.

[Walddk]

fred, on Oct 31 2008, 12:11 AM, said:

mikeh, on Oct 30 2008, 10:01 PM, said:

But, with an expert, 3♦ is clearly best even without the prior agreement that it is invitational plus... after all, we are definitely bidding again over 3♠.

Mike,

I don't understand how the "invitiational plus" splinter can possibly work without some pretty serious artificiality to sort out opener's range.

For example, what is responder supposed to do if he wants to play game opposite an invitational hand? Bid game I assume. Then if opener has a strong splinter, how is he supposed to know if he should bid again?

Maybe responder is supposed to cuebid something (if he has something to cuebid) with a hand that could produce slam opposite a big splinter? If so then I assume that opener would always sign off if he had the invitational hand. But that will cause problems for responder if he is strong enough to be interested in slam even if opener has only invitational values.

Feels like the same problem that is basically impossible to solve without some serious hoop-jumping when you play that cuebid of overcall is "limit raise or better".

Am I missing something?

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Since I also play 3♦ as invitational or better (stated above), I allow myself to reply although you addressed your question to Mike. This is how I play the mini-splinter in a couple of partnerships:

1♣ - 1♠
3♦ - 3♠*

* Sign off opposite a limit raise.

...

1♣ - 1♠
3♦ - 3♥**

** What type of splinter do you have?

Opener will bid 3♠ with the invite, anything but 3♠ with the big splinter, usually a cue bid. The 3♦ splinter is specifically a singleton. The idea is that responder takes over if he is slammy opposite the big splinter.

I am not saying that this is great, but it's playable, and I can't recall that this method has brought us into trouble.

Roland

[H_KARLUK]

stjk, on Oct 30 2008, 10:03 PM, said:

IMP team match, non Vul:

Kxxx KQx A AKxxx

you  LHO  pard  RHO
1C  Pass  1S    Pass
?

Will you bid 4D (SPLINTER) or 4S or something else?

IF you bid 4D and pard bid 4H, will you RKC?

Thanks,

3♦

Economy of space, 2♦ is not a reverse ? My CB style is shortness+fit. Rest responder's biz.

Our CC tells 1♣>1♠ then 4 ♦ Minorwood. Asks RKCB due to last bid suit. It's sometimes good to learn side suit key values.

[cherdano]

It seems "with an expert" has become synonymous to "with someone who plays the followup auction exactly as I do".
Playing with an expert who thinks that 4♦ is a GF splinter and 3♦ is an invitational splinter, I find it obvious to bid 4♦. I would only bid 3♦ with a huge splinter that can bid again over partner's jump to game.

[mikeh]

fred, on Oct 30 2008, 05:11 PM, said:

mikeh, on Oct 30 2008, 10:01 PM, said:

But, with an expert, 3♦ is clearly best even without the prior agreement that it is invitational plus... after all, we are definitely bidding again over 3♠.

Mike,

I don't understand how the "invitiational plus" splinter can possibly work without some pretty serious artificiality to sort out opener's range.

For example, what is responder supposed to do if he wants to play game opposite an invitational hand? Bid game I assume. Then if opener has a strong splinter, how is he supposed to know if he should bid again?

Maybe responder is supposed to cuebid something (if he has something to cuebid) with a hand that could produce slam opposite a big splinter? If so then I assume that opener would always sign off if he had the invitational hand. But that will cause problems for responder if he is strong enough to be interested in slam even if opener has only invitational values.

Feels like the same problem that is basically impossible to solve without some serious hoop-jumping when you play that cuebid of overcall is "limit raise or better".

Am I missing something?

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

well, I am still forming one partnership in which we are considering this approach, and we are in the early stages.. and I suspect I may lose the argument anyway. The 2 partnerships where I did actually have firm agreements are no longer active. I don't think there is any cause and effect relationship, tho

Responder signs off with a non-acceptance, and jumps to game with hands that would accept an invite but have no slam interest... our approach is generally to stretch to accept game invitations but to be middle-of-the-road on slams, so there is a family of hands that would jump to game.

For the family that has slam interest over either splinter, use the 3♥ relay.

Opener returns to 3♠ with the invitational hand, and now we are in a very comfortable situation. Any move by responder announces interest opposite the limited hand shown.

The relay announces interest opposite a big splinter, so any bid other than 3♠ shows a big splinter. This confers captaincy on responder, but this is often the case after any splinter sequence.

I think one reason this seemed to work quite well is that we conserve an entire level of bidding with 3♦, and that effectively gives us 5 calls unavailable over 4♦.

Now, I have never played a lot of bridge, and have only played in one serious long-term partnership involving this usage (and we played relatively infrequently) so maybe I simply haven't been exposed to enough occurences to realize any major problems...

[sathyab]

If you bid 4♦ with this hand, it looks reasonable to continue with RKC over partner's 4♥ as he most likely will have something resembling QJxxx Axx xxx xx or QJxxx Axx xx xxx to cue-bid, although it might be a close decision with the second hand that contains xxx in opener's first suit. But I'm more worried that he might sign-off in 4♠ with a hand like AQxxx xx KJxx xx or AQxx xxx KJxx Qx.