joker_gib Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 [hv=d=s&v=b&s=sq987ha75dkqj95c6]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] You are dealer and south : 1♦ (-) 1♠ (-)? You don't splay mini splinter ! What's your bid ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 I am a 2S bidder with this. I believe in fairly sound 3S bids in a natural system base, and bidding 3S with this makes your range too wide. This also ties in well to not opening crappy hands. This also ties in well with responding with crappy hands. This also ties in with making game tries aggressively over this auction. Basically this ties into a whole style, and you could play a completely different style but it should be based on all of the factors I mentioned. If you were to play a strong club (yes I know which forum this is B)) you could bid 3S with this (or 2H if u play with jdonn :)) which ties in well to opening crappy hands and playing limited openers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winstonm Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 I am a 2S bidder with this. I believe in fairly sound 3S bids in a natural system base, and bidding 3S with this makes your range too wide. This also ties in well to not opening crappy hands. This also ties in well with responding with crappy hands. This also ties in with making game tries aggressively over this auction. Basically this ties into a whole style, and you could play a completely different style but it should be based on all of the factors I mentioned. If you were to play a strong club (yes I know which forum this is B)) you could bid 3S with this (or 2H if u play with jdonn :)) which ties in well to opening crappy hands and playing limited openers.You've been watching too much "Caddyshack" - "Want to tie me up with your tie, Ty?" :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 2S, this isn't close to me. Even if I had an invitational club splinter available (as I did with hannie - has anyone seen him lately btw?), I would not use it on this hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 Even in a strong club I think this is easy 2♠ if the choice is just between that and 3♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joker_gib Posted February 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 2S, this isn't close to me. Even if I had an invitational club splinter available (as I did with hannie - has anyone seen him lately btw?), I would not use it on this hand. Well Arend, for once, I don't agree with you ! B) Well, I think that if I have the mini splinter available I would use it for this type of borderline hand... Justin adn Josh, If you had the mini available, would you use it ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 I would bid 2S even if I had a mini-splinter available which I do with my regular partner. No, haven't seen hannie, I think he left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 This situation is one key argument for why I have for years required an unbalanced hand to open 1♦. Now, when I rebid 2♠, partner will know that I have spade support, real diamonds (4+), a stiff or void on the outside (and hence about 3 distributional points), and enough to otherwise open (range now about 13+ to 17- net points). He can bid 2NT to ask for more info, allowing me to bid 3♣ to show my stiff. Sure, this means that my 1♣-P-1♠-P-2♠ sequences, when unbalanced, are not known to be unbalanced (not a great loss to only cover one minor when the alternative is neither), and when balanced either minor could be better. But, experience tells me that this works in the long run. Plus, if I really want to play mini-splinters by opener, 1♣...3♦ and 1♣...3♥ are both available, whereas 1♦...3♣ probably is not a mini-splinter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 [hv=d=s&v=b&s=sq987ha75dkqj95c6]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] You are dealer and south : 1♦ (-) 1♠ (-)? You don't splay mini splinter ! What's your bid ? 2s wtp? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 Justin adn Josh, If you had the mini available, would you use it ? No I would still have a hand worth 3♠ if not playing them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edmunte1 Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 2♠ is enough, too many losers(6) for 3♠. Bidding 3♠ with this hand will result more often in going overboard than in reaching a thin game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 3S. This should also show at least 5-4 oran unbal. hand. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 2♠ is enough, too many losers(6) for 3♠. Bidding 3♠ with this hand will result more often in going overboard than in reaching a thin game Hi, I can live with bidding 2S, but if you are usingLTC, as I do, than 3S is clear, because 3S doesshow a 6 looser hand. I think you can downgrade this to 6,5, and ifyou believe in sound invites, than 2S is clear,but if you count this as 6, than 3S it is. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 2♠ is enough, too many losers(6) for 3♠. Bidding 3♠ with this hand will result more often in going overboard than in reaching a thin game Hi, I can live with bidding 2S, but if you are usingLTC, as I do, than 3S is clear, because 3S doesshow a 6 looser hand. I think you can downgrade this to 6,5, and ifyou believe in sound invites, than 2S is clear,but if you count this as 6, than 3S it is. With kind regardsMarlowe In my Klinger LTC book this is a 6.5 loser hand not 6/.Not close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 2♠ is enough, too many losers(6) for 3♠. Bidding 3♠ with this hand will result more often in going overboard than in reaching a thin game Hi, I can live with bidding 2S, but if you are usingLTC, as I do, than 3S is clear, because 3S doesshow a 6 looser hand. I think you can downgrade this to 6,5, and ifyou believe in sound invites, than 2S is clear,but if you count this as 6, than 3S it is. With kind regardsMarlowe In my Klinger LTC book this is a 6.5 loser hand not 6/.Not close. I wont argue with downgrading this to 6,5, but personnallyI dont really use the adjustment factors, I just look at the handand ask myself, if I can I live with the result of the raw count (= 6 loosers, no discussion about that), and if yes, I make the bid. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 2♠. In my methods I've shown anunbalanced hand with this sequence, but I'd bid the same with standard methods. The hand just isn't worth 3♠ - I completely echo Justin's first post here. I don't understand employing a 3♣ splinter - how would you bid a monster 2-suiter then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 2♠ that is how I show a minimum opening with some spades. Sure I have a good minimum so I will accept any move from partner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 I don't understand employing a 3♣ splinter - how would you bid a monster 2-suiter then? Hannie plays that 1♦ can't be strong balanced, that 2N is a forcing raise of spades (no shortness unless superstrong), and so 3♠ can show an invitational hand with club shortness. Han seems to have copied that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Hmm yes, that's what I play as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hatchett Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 I also consider 2♠ clear on this hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinidad Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 I am with the minority: 3♠. 1) It shows that my hand is unbalanced. (My 1♦ opening can be balanced.) 2) I like my nice diamond suit. (It is fine to add half a loser for the ♠Q, if you then subtract half a loser for the ♦J9. KQJ9x is substantially better than KQxxx. The difference is a lot more than 1 HCP.)3) I do have good spade spots. Rik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ai Hao Posted February 12, 2008 Report Share Posted February 12, 2008 2♠, if partner can't bid again, the game is far away. Terry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted February 12, 2008 Report Share Posted February 12, 2008 2♠, if partner can't bid again, the game is far away. Terry I agree with your bid but if you think you are not going to ever miss game if partner passes that is really wrong. Do you think partner will game try with AKxxx xx xxx xxx? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.