Fit jump or splinter over 1M-(X)-

[cnszsun]

I've seen some discussions here about the responder's bidding structure over 1M-(X).

I have a question related to it. How to define responder's double jump shift, for example: 1S-(X)-4C/4D/4H. Which way is better in practice, fit-jump or splinter? Supposing the single jump shift will be fit-jump.

[mike777]

Prefer third option:

1s=3h=stiff or void somewhere, relay then tells if stiff or void and where

1h=2s=stiff somewhere

1h=3s=void somewhere

1major=4c=17+ 4333

1major=4d=5 trumps and 1 to 1.5 outside quick tricks.

 

This follows the theory that after 1H/S=(x)=? if responder is the weaker/limited hand then responder tells and opener asks.

OTOH if responder is the stronger/unlimited hand then responder asks with 2NT(Jacoby/Bergen) and opener tells.

[Trinidad]

After an overcall I play a splinter in their suit and fit jumps in new suits. The reason is that the opponents have shown length in one suit. Therefore, it will be likely that I have either shortness in their suit, or length in a new suit. It will be less likely that I will be short in a new suit.

 

After a take out double, the opponents have shown length in all suits and shortness in ours. That is nothing new, since just the fact that I have a fit for partner already says that the opponents are short in our suit. The only additional information that the takeout double gives is that this opponent has a decent hand and that his remaining suits divide about evenly. Therefore, when it comes to the question of fit bids or splinters, there is no reason to play this different from 1M-(Pass)-??. That means that I play splinters after a takeout double.

 

Rik

[mr1303]

I like to play that:

 

1M (X) 3 new suit = fit jump

 

1M (X) 4 new suit = splinter.

[joker_gib]

After an overcall I play a splinter in their suit and fit jumps in new suits. The reason is that the opponents have shown length in one suit. Therefore, it will be likely that I have either shortness in their suit, or length in a new suit. It will be less likely that I will be short in a new suit.

 

After a take out double, the opponents have shown length in all suits and shortness in ours. That is nothing new, since just the fact that I have a fit for partner already says that the opponents are short in our suit. The only additional information that the takeout double gives is that this opponent has a decent hand and that his remaining suits divide about evenly. Therefore, when it comes to the question of fit bids or splinters, there is no reason to play this different from 1M-(Pass)-??. That means that I play splinters after a takeout double.

 

Rik

I play exactly the same !

 

Alain

[paulg]

Read Justin's thoughts on this subject in his blog - a scary coincidence or partner?

 

Paul

[inquiry]

I play it as a fit jump (and the jump to the three level as well).

 

Paul pointed to justin's discussion of 1S-(x)-4C as a "fit jump" on a particular hand as being wrong. On his example hand, the fit jump was wrong in his view for tatical reasons. The reason is it allowed the opponents room to bid a red suit at the four level to suggest a save. Of course, the same logic could apply to a 4C splinter (and add double 4C to suggest a save in clubs, so increase the possible save suits by one). So don't necessarily assume the position proposed is that since 4C on his hand is out, a splinter would be better (in fact the hand held a singleton diamond and he did not advocate bidding 4D as splinter either).

 

I see some use a 3 level jump as a fit jump and a four level jump as a splinter. The logic here is if you had game forcing values, after a 3 level jump, you can just keep bidding. Thus, they are getting both options. I prefer not to play this way. I use the three level jump as game invite fit jump, not game invite Plus, the reason being the bidding will likely continue and it is good if partner knows the overall value of your hand so he can make an intellegent decision. Imagine, for example...

 

1H-(x)-3C -4S

?

 

If 3C can be forcing only to 3H or can be game going with clubs, how is partner to make an intellegent decision. But if 3C was limited to values for 3H raise (and a direct 4C bid as one with sufficient values to force to game), partner will be much better positioned here to make an informed decision.

[mike777]

Note Justin's excellent Blog discussion. Since I do not have 1-1.5 outside tricks I just bid 1s=x=4s telling partner we have less defense against a 5 level bid.

 

Add more defense and quick tricks and we could have bid 1s=x=4D! Partner would know about defense in my hand but not about the long club suit, neither would the opponents.