[jdonn]

Mike I haven't said yet nice to have you back!

I agree the only "good" way to bid the hand is a strong jump shift to 2♠, followed by something like 4♦ to show a void. That is probably the only auction on which I'd be somewhat comfortable passing partner in 4♥.

But I'm really not a fan of responding 1♠. Not only do some auctions become bulky as you say (in fact you may not even support hearts below the 4 level) but you can never show support this good. Your partner is likely to have Kxxxx or KJxxx of trumps, which he will always hate opposite what he thinks is three card support.

If your goal is to get information about partner's hand then I really think you should start with 2NT. If your goal is to give information about your hand then ok, splinter and bid again. But I think it's imperitive to support right away.

[kenrexford]

We all agree!

Everyone thinks that the four options (yes, I said FOUR) all suck!

1. Jacoby 2NT? Sucks
2. Splinter? Sucks
3. 1♠? Sucks
4. 2♣ (my usualy default)? Sucks bad (this time)

Of course, people who don't play SJS say that SJS looks great. Actually, I think SJS probably sucks too.

1♥-P-2♠-P-3♠ is the start. You want to get back to hearts. How????

So...

5. SJS? Sucks

Maybe this is one of those hands where the old-timers' methods work best.

My new favorite auction:

1♥-P-6♥. You lead!

[jdonn]

kenrexford, on Nov 9 2009, 05:35 PM, said:

Of course, people who don't play SJS say that SJS looks great. Actually, I think SJS probably sucks too.

1♥-P-2♠-P-3♠ is the start. You want to get back to hearts. How????

The way they are played in southern California, opener bids the next step on almost all hands as a default. So they would bid:

1♥ - 2♠ -
2NT - 4♦ -

2♠: SJS
2NT: Default bid (relay?)
4♦: 5+ spades, 4+ hearts, diamond void.

Looks good to me!

[aguahombre]

yep, if using SJS you want to stay out of partner's way to allow him to complete describing why he jump shifted. the 2NT auto is one way. But opener does not get to rebid at or above his opening bid suit in any case.

[ONEferBRID]

Just thinking out loud here also.
I think I'll try Ken's 2C! also ...2/1 GF where a " splinter or Jac2Nt may be imperfect". But I'll use it with my "homegrown scheme" for 1H openers designed to show Opener with a minimum open or "extras" ( 15,16+) .... with or without a 4 card Sp suit.

My method would not be as stringent as his for bids after the 2S cuebid ...
and Responder will be able to get in a Spade cue at the 3-level.... which will allow
Opener to go key card knowing his Sp KQ must be golden as long as Responder's shortage ( void ) isn't in Sp:

Opener
♠ K Q 2
♥ K T 5 3 2
♦ A J 7 4
♣ T


Responder
♠ A J T 8 7
♥ A Q 9 6 4
♦ Void
♣ K 9 4

1H - 2C! GF ( Clubs and/or Ht support )
2D! - 2H
2S ( courtesy cue ) - 3C ( cue )
3D ( cue ) - 3S ( cue )
4NT ( RKC for Hts ) - 5NT ( even, 0 or 2 + void somewhere )
6H

Where
2D! = minimum open; natural, 4+cards Diam, denies 4 cards Sp
( other replies to show "extras" with no 4s or
min or extras w/4s )

[the hog]

kenrexford, on Nov 9 2009, 06:33 AM, said:

Thinking out loud...

I tend to like 2/1 GF sequences when a splinter or Jacoby 2NT is imperfect. Both are terribly imperfect in this situation, so, let's try it out. I usually anticipate a likely auction in making a decision

1♥-2♣(GF, natural or support)
2♦-2♥(trumps set)
2♠(spade control)-???

This likely start is predictable.
snipped

2C? So you ignore not just 5 card support, but also a 5 card S suit in which you would like to know partner's holding. Sometimes I think you post stuff like this just to get a reaction. Well, you got mine.

[ggwhiz]

I like (not love) jacoby 2nt as the lower slower option on just about any hand that others splinter on. Too many bad experiences as a rookie with wide ranging abuse of splinters.

Comments in this thread range from too strong to splinter to a whole bunch of perfect bid but you can't pass 4h or you should pass 4h, the 1h opener should move.....YIKES! No more splinters for me.

I'll consider the 2c bid as a little less flawed than a splinter but just a little less.

[Vampyr]

Jlall, on Nov 8 2009, 09:59 PM, said:

South is way too good to splinter and pass a sign off.

I agree, and I don't think that South has the sort of monster that can splinter and then bid on.

Since splinters take up so much room, I prefer to have them closely defined -- I like 3 or 4 controls (K=1, A=2), and not enough HCP for a FG raise.

[benlessard]

Responder pass of 4H is a joke.

Quote

1♥-2♣(GF, natural or support)
2♦-2♥(trumps set)
2♠(spade control)-???

Why bidding 3H to show 2 top 3H honnor ?
What about jumping to 4D wich hopefully show a void.

For my point of view i hate splinter that dont make the difference between a stiff and a void, the difference is too important for a bid that take that much space.

[jdeegan]

A splinter is sometimes called a "picture" bid. It paints a hand with good trump support, shortage in the "splinter" suit, and where the high card values and long side suit values to justify the game force are minimal. Usually, 4-4-4-1 shape.
Here, responder has far too good and far too flexible a hand to splinter. Your reaction to a splinter was 100% correct. The ♦ ace was fine (by the way), but the rest of your hand was a minimum. Think "Splinter is a one shot picture bid to describe a very particular sort of hand". Otherwise, just bid zee hand. Good luck, and good bridge.

[kenrexford]

The_Hog, on Nov 11 2009, 10:31 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Nov 9 2009, 06:33 AM, said:

Thinking out loud...

I tend to like 2/1 GF sequences when a splinter or Jacoby 2NT is imperfect.  Both are terribly imperfect in this situation, so, let's try it out. I usually anticipate a likely auction in making a decision

1♥-2♣(GF, natural or support)
2♦-2♥(trumps set)
2♠(spade control)-???

This likely start is predictable. 
snipped

2C? So you ignore not just 5 card support, but also a 5 card S suit in which you would like to know partner's holding. Sometimes I think you post stuff like this just to get a reaction. Well, you got mine.

Um, if you know how to read an entire post, you know that I considered and then rejected it. Is there some reason why you would not consider a call that might seem odd at first, to play out the auction mentally to see if it might actually work best? Or, is your bidding style one where you mentally plug your actual hand into some set of definitions of responses to see what it most closely fits and then deal with the remainder of the auction later? I like planning, myself.

Heck, if a forcing 1NT might produce the best auction, I'd go with that.