what went wrong

[jillybean]

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=s8532ha2dkj64ck63&s=skjt4hkt9daqt53c8]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

 -     1♦    Pass  1♠

 2♣    2♠    Pass  3♣

 Dbl   3♠    Pass  4♦

 Pass  Pass  Pass  

 

 

Hi

 

What went wrong here? I guess I could have splintered 4♣ but I wanted to show the ♦ fit. If Im willing to play 3nt if partner has a ♣ stop shouldn’t 4♦ be forcing 1R , gf?

[gwnn]

S bid perfectly (OK too optimistic and creative, but basically it's OK). N misclicked (I hope!). NS have found an 8+ card major fit (I assume 2♠ promises 4 cards), so they shall play it. 3♣ was an advance cuebid, and 4♦ shows another cuebid. the subtleties (what kind of cue it is, etc) are up to the partnership to decide, but that was basically what happened.

[Cascade]

North opened light and panicked.

 

Its unclear what 3♣ should show but that didn't cause any problems. With a double fit south decided to investigate further. North should never pass 4♦. Especially not with four spades.

[bb79]

Depends on style, but I don't agree with 1♦ opening, especially at this vul.

I think 4♣ better than 3♣. Even if partner is minimum, You may make slam if p doesn't have any wasted value in clubs (AQxx, Ax, Kxxx, xxx).

I don't understand last pass by N,( felt guilty of opening? sleeping?)

[the hog]

I would have bid 4C rather than 3. However as Wayne states passing 4D is ?$#@%!

[cherdano]

You bid well. I would have splintered but I don't think 3♣ then 4♦ can be criticized, which is clearly a slam try.

[skjaeran]

Agree that splinter would have been better.

 

That said, north has no reason whatsoever passing a partscore after you GFed. Obviously (s)he should sign off with 4♠ over 4♦.

[vuroth]

North reversed 1♦ and pass? :)

 

I wouldn't dream of opening North's hand, but my style tends to be rather (overbearingly) sound.

 

I would have passed the double, trying to limit my hand. I don't really see how it can be a desire to defend, but maybe I'm wrong.

 

Even if you think that 4♦ is natural and possibly to play (and I don't, I think it's a control bid), I can't imagine why you'd rather play there than in game. If you're already at the 4 level....

 

I don't know whether south would have been better off bidding 4!C immediately, or doing it the way it was done. Certainly, the double fit and the short clubs are worth knowing about.

 

0.02

 

V

[jillybean]

For those who splinter 4♣ after 2♠, why dont you want/need to show the ♦ fit?

[P_Marlowe]

For those who splinter 4♣ after 2♠, why dont you want to show the ♦ fit?

Hi,

 

You cant show the diamonds fit, after you have discovered

the spade fit, any diamond bids by South shows only values

not necessarily lenght.

 

It makes certainly sense to tell North about the diamond

values, if you want to investigate slam.

Another possible option would have been to bid 3D instead

of 3C, but 3C is certainly not a bad bid.

 

Having said that, your best bid over 3S is 4S, partner

showed a min. opener and declined the game invitation,

i.e. chances for slam are remote.

Bidding 4S prevents partner from passing below game level.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[kenrexford]

1♦ (ok with that)

1♠ (yes)

-2♣-2♠ (yes -- does this promise four I assume?)

3♣ (yes)

-X-?

 

Opener expects 3♣ to be shortness, I hope. His hand has just devalued to an 8-count, except that the club King still rates to take a trick. So, he bids 3♠ and hopes to make this.

 

3♠ (yes -- bust -- anything else, including pass, would encourage)

4♦?

 

Too much. Even if you are showing non-serious confirmation of slam interest with a diamond card, not first-round club control, you hope for something like ♠Axxx ♥A ♦Kxxxx ♣xxx, which seems like a bit much for partner's 3♠ call. However, maybe partner is known to be extrremely conservative. If so, then maybe.

 

The pass from Opener of 4♦? Absurd. You might not even have a diamond fit. I would bid 4♦ with the stiff Queen. That may be a bit much for most folks, but I doubt that 4♦ shows AQxxx for anyone. Even AQx is probably not the minimum holding for this call.

[jillybean]

Ok! If I can't show the double fit after finding the ♠ fit then the 4♦ cue bid must promise AorK.

 

I'm not sure when I should be using a cue bid vs. a splinter. After partner has shown a min and we have little chance of slam is it better to splinter and simply force game, and let partner make a move if she has extras?

[kenrexford]

I'm not sure when I should be using a cue bid vs. a splinter. After partner has shown a min and we have little chance of slam is it better to splinter and simply force game, and let partner make a move if she has extras?

This is a very good question, but it is not an easy one to answer. Most people simply decide which they like better and then do that, having no citation of authority to a partnership nuance or agreement justifying this decision (except perhaps something mudane like HCP range). This yields system redundancies.

 

For this reason, I personally have a few rules that I like. A different set of rules might be inferior or superior, but a set of rules always seems superior to no understandings. My rules are complicated and somewhat situational. However, this one sequence seems easy to figure out, even if I have never considered it specifically.

 

Rule #1: Splinters show stiffs unless we have agreed that THIS splinter shows a void. Here, then, a splinter passes Rule #1 as an option.

 

Rule #2: Splinters show very strong values in any side suit I already bid, and, if so, a lack of control in the fourth suit. Not applicable here, because I have not shown any side suit.

 

Hypothetical Contextual Corollary to Rule #2: Splinters show very strong support for partner's side suit if I have never shown my own side suit, and, if so, a lack of control in the fourth suit. I like this corollary. It almost works here, because the diamonds rock. However, I do have heart control, making this corollary, if agreed, rule out the splinter. But...

 

Rule #3: Splinters tend to promise good trumps, meaning two of the top three honors. This rules out the splinter for me, because the trumps suck.

 

Rule #4: Splinters tend to be more flexible if there is more space between the bid and game in the agreed suit. Here, a 4♣ splinter is in the "ideal situation," because it allows opener to bid 4♦, to bid 4♥, and to bid 4♦ and react to your 4♥ call. It is not as ideal as a spade sxplinter with hearts agreed, but it is the second-most-ideal splinter. So, 4♣ seems capable of being rather flexible. Whatever the follow-up would show or ask may be an exception to the Rules.

 

GENERAL RULE: Splinters are used when a predicted cuebidding sequence will leave you undecided and undescribed.

[han]

What went wrong was that partner made a big blooper. Happens to my partners all the time so I know how frustrating it is. :)

[vuroth]

Yup. Happens to my partner's partners all the time.

 

:)

[P_Marlowe]

<snip>

I'm not sure when I should be using a cue bid vs. a splinter. After partner has shown a min and we have little chance of slam is it better to splinter and simply force game, and let partner make a move if she has extras?

You left out an important 3rd alternative: forget about slam

altogether.

Sometimes the opponents will be able to use the additional

information, e.g. for deciding what to lead, or you give them

the chance to make a lead directing double.

 

To answer your question: A splinter bid asks partner a fairly

specific question: Do you have wastage in the splinter suit?

And it sends a fairly specific message: It is your believe, that

if partner does not hold wastage in the splinter suit, that the

partnership has a fair chance to make a slam, even if partner

is looking at a min. for his bid.

=> Splinter bids work pretty well if partner is limited, because

if he has his bid, and if he does not hold wastage he can move

on. Having his bid means, that he should ignore the wastage and

ask himself, if what is left, is still enough to make the bids he

has made.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe