[JLOGIC]

kenberg, on Aug 28 2010, 07:44 AM, said:

The sequence thatl I want to discuss with partner is 2♠-3♥-4♣. It certainly makes sense for this to be a cue in support of hearts, as recommended. With that agreement the lack of such a cue would be useful as well. After 2♠-3♥-4♥ I think I, as the heart holder, would look at my three off the top losers and pass in an instant. Mostly I would be right, whatever our agreements, because the 2♠ bidder will seldom have two aces. With the cue agreement, I will even more often be right in passing the raise to 4♥.

Yeah def agree with all of this

[jillybean]

JLOGIC, on Aug 28 2010, 05:48 AM, said:

kenberg, on Aug 28 2010, 07:44 AM, said:

The sequence  thatl I want to discuss with partner is 2♠-3♥-4♣. It certainly makes sense for this to be a cue in support of hearts, as recommended. With that agreement the lack of such a cue would be useful as well. After   2♠-3♥-4♥ I think I, as the heart holder, would look at my three off the top losers and pass in an instant. Mostly I would be right, whatever our agreements, because the 2♠ bidder will seldom have two aces. With the cue agreement, I will even more often  be right in passing the raise to 4♥.

Yeah def agree with all of this

Ok, I like this.

If partner wants to investigate slam in the weak2 suit, he must start with 2N (ogust for us) and then subsequent bids are cue bids?

2♠:2N
3♠:4x cue?

[jillybean]

I seem to have shut down the discussion, was this a silly question ?

[bluecalm]

I have to test my partner on this 2♠ - 4♥ one but I am pretty sure he will take it as splinter. Imo splinter is useful as slam invite. There is definitely point in playing that, maybe 4♥ is more useful as natural. I don't know but saying:

Quote

There is not really much of a point in playing splinters opposite a weak 2. Partner probably doesn't have any wasted values to evaluate.

is LOL imo. You gain a lot, one thing is that if you have slam invite without shortness and go through 2NT (w/e that is) to set spades and then cue partner knows you don't have SI with shortness but A or K which makes it easier to evaluate his hand.
Also it's nonsense to say that partner probably doesn't have wasted values. So what ? He sometimes have wasted values and sometimes he is 6-4 (huge opposite splinter). Sometimes he has only 2 cards opposite splinter (bad). He will be able to evaluate those hands properly.

Quote

2♠:2N
3♠:4x cue?

Yes I think so but as I said I like to be able to do that and splinter round before too.

Quote

2♠-3♥-4♣

Cue. What else ?

Quote

in this zone 1♠-4♥ is specifically an exception to splinter for most (so it is natural)

I am not sure if that's exception for most ? Someone knowing more about "standards" than me could comment on that ?

Quote

I seem to have shut down the discussion, was this a silly question ?

Maybe everybody just went to sleep. There are times of the day where forum is less active

[jillybean]

Yes, and I've been known to be impatient.

[EricK]

jillybean, on Aug 28 2010, 07:07 AM, said:

I opened 2♠ and partner bid 4♥, which I took to be a splinter

2♠:4♥
4♠:5♥

AQ9643, T84, 32, A5
opposite
5,AKQJ762,T,KQJT

The auction could have been
2♠:3♥
4♥:4♠*
5♦*:6♥

Or, if I open 1♠ it is easy to find.

If you took 4♥ to be a splinter, you should in no way be signing off in 4♠. For a weak 2, your hand is massive opposite a ♥ splinter, and a 5♣ cue seems clear. Your hand is pretty good opposite a natural 4♥ bid too, so you might very well have survived a 5♣ bid on the actual hand too.

[kenberg]

jillybean, on Aug 28 2010, 11:04 AM, said:

I seem to have shut down the discussion, was this a silly question ?

Definitely not silly from my standpoint. I like it as a cue, and I think it would be taken as a cue, but I will ask a partner or two about this.

[gnasher]

jillybean, on Aug 28 2010, 01:57 PM, said:

If partner wants to investigate slam in the weak2 suit, he must start with 2N (ogust for us) and then subsequent bids are cue bids?

2♠:2N
3♠:4x cue?

If 2♠-3x is forcing, then yes 2♠-2NT;3♠-4x is a cue-bid (though you might find it more useful to use 4♣ as a shortage ask)