splinter or cue?

[jillybean]

Playing 15-17 nt's, stayman, transfers, texas and wot-not

 

1nt:2♥

2♠: 4♣

 

Do YOU play 4♣ here as a splinter or a cue, or something else - and why?

[PedroG]

Hi,

 

well not sure if you interrested in a begginer response :)

 

I would say that it could be Gerber or some sort of RKC Gerber. But since perhaps you have the texas+4NT for ace asking I would say that this should have only 5 cards and use the 4NT has a choice of slams...

 

What is wot-not B)

 

Pedro

[mikeh]

splinter

 

it is important to understand that this sequence commits to spades so should promise 6 spades with interest beyond game...

 

If we had only 5 spades, we'd either be bidding the appropriate number of notrump, quantitatively, or bidding a side suit.

 

If we had no interest beyond game, we'd texas and pass

 

If we wanted to ask for Aces, we'd texas and then bid keycard

 

So the only options are 'cue' or 'splinter' or 'asking bid'. Very few players play asking bids these days, outside of a few specific auctions, and I doubt that many B/I players are even familiar with the concept... splinters supplanted them in expert usage decades ago.

 

I suppose one could play it as 'cue', but I think the overwhelming consensus in the expert community would be splinter... and splinter, to me, makes the best sense.

 

We are alerting partner to the fact that we are in the slam zone if he has little wastage in clubs. So he downgrades holdings like KJ10x and upgrades Axx or xxx, and this is far more likely to be of value when responder already knows within a point, the total hcp strength partner will hold. If partner co-operates, we can assume that his points are 'working', and if he signs off, we know to bid on only with substantial extras.

[cherdano]

Of course I agree with Mike but let me just add that when you have 6 spades and no shortness, you can either

- bid texas and pass (no slam interest)

- transfer and jump to 4S (slam interest)

- texas and keycard (slam force if enough keycards).

[mikeh]

Of course I agree with Mike

Can I have this pinned? B)

[jillybean]

Pedro, wot-not is just what I call all those other conventions that I collect B)

 

Thanks Mike, Arend.

 

 

So for this auction, I should hold something like: (I hate doing these)

 

1n:2♥

2♠:4♣

 

KQxxxx,AKxx,Kx,x

 

Change a K to a Q and would you still splinter?

[mikeh]

Pedro, wot-not is just what I call all those other conventions I collect  B)

 

Thanks Mike, Arend.

 

 

So for this auction, I should hold something like:

 

1n:2♥

2♠:4♣

 

KQxxxx,AKxx,Kx,x 

 

Change a K to a Q and would you still splinter?

I would tend not to hold a good 4 card side suit with a powerful hand, since the 4-4 might play better than the 6-2. So the prototypical hand will be 6=3=3=1.

 

As for the strength, AQxxxx Kxx Kxx x is an easy splinter. The idea is that if you can picture a lot of hands with, say, 14 hcp outside of clubs that makes slam good, go ahead and splinter. Partner will only cooperate with 14 points or so outside of clubs, or with 10+ outside of clubs and the club A.

 

BTW, opener can cooperate with fewer hcp with a good fit and ruffing values... say KJxx Ax KQxx Kx... I'd cooperate even without the spade Jack because the Ax in hearts is probably as valuable as AQx... and we'd love KJxx AQx KQxx xx.

[hrothgar]

Pedro, wot-not is just what I call all those other conventions I collect B)

 

Thanks Mike, Arend.

 

 

So for this auction, I should hold something like:

 

1n:2♥

2♠:4♣

 

KQxxxx,AKxx,Kx,x

 

Change a K to a Q and would you still splinter?

Hi Kathryn

 

1. I think that a splinter is the most reasonable definition for the 4♣ rebid

 

2. I'm not sure whether I could chose to Splinter with the hand in question. I suspect that you are strong enough to try for slam even if partner has some wasted values opposite your stiff. I would (probably) start by bidding 2♥ as a trasnfer to spades and then rebid 3♥ to show my second suit.

 

I'm tempted to say that something like the following feels right (maybe slightly stronger)

 

♠ KQxxxx

♥ KJx

♦ KTx

♣ x

 

Ideally, you want to show a hand that is going to produce a good play for 6 if partner tables a normal 1NT opening with xxxx (maybe Qxxx) in clubs....

 

One could argue that this could be a two way bid - You typically have a weak splinter and intend that partner take control of the auction. However, on rare occasions you might have a strong splinter that plans to bid exclusion keycard after a signoff...

[Mbodell]

+1 for this needs to be a splinter, at least undiscussed, when playing 2 and 4 level transfers. And you don't need much if your hand is control rich since you are shooting for a possible ~26-28 HCP slam if partner has no wastage in clubs. KQxxxx KQx Kxx x is easily good enough for me opposite 15-17 nt.

[P_Marlowe]

Splinter.

 

You have the chance to bid clubs natural

and game forcing a level below.

 

For your example hand (even if you exchange

a king with a Queen): If you are certain, that

you want to play spades, than yes, I would

splinter.

But holding a 4 card heart suit, I would first

look for a 4-4 in hearts via stayman.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Cascade]

Standard SAYC doesn't usually include splinters.

 

However 1NT 3Major is a slam try. That means that transfer and jump can be used for splinters and a direct 3Major can be used as a balanced (no singleton) slam try (or possibly a very strong splinter).

 

If we use 1NT 3Major as something else - fragment with both minors etc - then we need a way to show a balanced (no singleton) slam try with a six-card major. If we do not have one then either transfer and jump needs to just be a cue or transfer and new suit can be not a real second suit.

[kenrexford]

I would tend not to hold a good 4 card side suit with a powerful hand, since the 4-4 might play better than the 6-2. So the prototypical hand will be 6=3=3=1.

 

As for the strength, AQxxxx Kxx Kxx x is an easy splinter. The idea is that if you can picture a lot of hands with, say, 14 hcp outside of clubs that makes slam good, go ahead and splinter. Partner will only cooperate with 14 points or so outside of clubs, or with 10+ outside of clubs and the club A.

 

BTW, opener can cooperate with fewer hcp with a good fit and ruffing values... say KJxx Ax KQxx Kx... I'd cooperate even without the spade Jack because the Ax in hearts is probably as valuable as AQx... and we'd love KJxx AQx KQxx xx.

I'd underline and elaborate on one thing here, and I think Mike will agree.

 

The closer the splinter to game, the stronger the holding.

 

In other words, consider the auction start of a transfer to spades and then a splinter. 1NT-P-2♥-P-2♠-P-?

 

4♣ (short clubs) can be aggressive. Partner can still cue 4♦ or 4♥, and you could cue 4♥ after 4♦. Whatever these sequences mean, you have five ways to pursue slam below game (4♦ by Opener and then decline 4♥, 4♦ by Opener can accept if 4♥ back at him, 4♥ by Opener, just going, or just declining).

 

4♦ (short diamonds) is middlish. Opener could accept, decline, or punt 4♥. Down to three options.

 

4♥ (short hearts) is strong. Opener has two options -- accept or decline.

 

Granted, there are options for Opener above game, wherein he commits to the five-level, but I think you will see my point that there are more options below game, safer options, the lower the splinter.

 

If quantitative thinking is used:

 

After 4♣:

1. 4♠ = ain't got it

2. 4NT = got it

3. 4♥ = 90% there

4. 4♦ = 70% or 80% there (4♥ asks if 80% there)

 

After 4♦:

1. 4♠ = nope

2. 4NT = yep

3. 4♥ = maybe

 

After 4♥:

1. 4♠ = nope

2. 4NT = yep

 

See?

[the hog]

Kathryn, we play it as an auto splinter. the hand you posted has too much potential in the 2nd 4 card suit. The splinter should show a good 6 carder with no side suit.

[han]

I play this as Gerber. Seriously.

[neilkaz]

Splinter in support of my at least 6 card ♠ suit and at least mild slam interest in hopes that the splinter find opener with no wastage in ♣.

[jillybean]

Kathryn, we play it as an auto splinter. the hand you posted has too much potential in the 2nd 4 card suit. The splinter should show a good 6 carder with no side suit.

Hi Ron - I agree, Im poor at putting together hands to demonstrate bidding sequences and 6331 is much better.

What is an auto splinter?

[inquiry]

Self splinter -- great spade suit, short club

[neilkaz]

Kathryn, we play it as an auto splinter. the hand you posted has too much potential in the 2nd 4 card suit. The splinter should show a good 6 carder with no side suit.

Hi Ron - I agree, Im poor at putting together hands to demonstrate bidding sequences and 6331 is much better.

What is an auto splinter?

I presume he means what we in the US refer to as a self splinter..ie splintering in support of your suit rather than PD's.

 

(I hope I have all this terminology correct :) ) .. neilkaz ..4♣ splinter here

[jillybean]

Kathryn, we play it as an auto splinter. the hand you posted has too much potential in the 2nd 4 card suit. The splinter should show a good 6 carder with no side suit.

Hi Ron - I agree, Im poor at putting together hands to demonstrate bidding sequences and 6331 is much better.

What is an auto splinter?

I presume he means what we in the US refer to as a self splinter..ie splintering in support of your suit rather than PD's.

 

(I hope I have all this terminology correct :) ) .. neilkaz ..4♣ splinter here

Supporting the suit that pard bid after the transfer? :) :)

[P_Marlowe]

Kathryn, we play it as an auto splinter. the hand you posted has too much potential in the 2nd 4 card suit. The splinter should show a good 6 carder with no side suit.

Hi Ron - I agree, Im poor at putting together hands to demonstrate bidding sequences and 6331 is much better.

What is an auto splinter?

An auto splinter is a bid, which sets ones own suit

as trumps and shows a side shortage.

 

Finding a general definition is hard, you know the bid

has to be an auto splinter when you see the bid.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[skjaeran]

This is an auto-splinter to me, setting spades.

 

Normally 6331, possibly 7330 or 6241 with bad diamonds.

Auto-splinters could be on singletons for me, whereas all direct splinters showing support for partners opening suit shows voids.

[Codo]

I agree with Wayne that this is an autosplinter as long as we have another way to show a slaminteressted one-suiter which needed just some outside cues to make slam.

[jillybean]

Just to clarify what people are calling auto or self splinters; it is a splinter supporting your own suit but obviously partner must bid the suit in response to a transfer or stayman bid first.

 

I do not distinguish between splinters containing a singleton or void as Harald does. Is this the standard, expert treatment?

[P_Marlowe]

<snip>

I do not distinguish between splinters containing a singleton or void as Harald does. Is this the standard, expert treatment?

No, certainly not.

 

But I dont claim to be an expert.

 

There are several schemes out there, one is,

that after a splinter the next steps asks partner

if the splinter is a single or a void, combining

this with a key card ask.

 

Splinters are similar to cue bids, some play, that

the 1st cue in a suit shows 1st round round, others,

that the first cue in a suit is either 1st or 2nd round

control.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[kenrexford]

Looking back at the original question (splinter or cue?), a "rest of the story" seems missing.

 

A common scheme:

 

1NT-P-transfer-P-major-P-?

 

3OM = sets trumps, demands cues (strong slam move; serious 3NT, LTTC)

4M = mild slam move (would Texas is no interest)

JS = Splinter

 

One problem is the transfer to hearts and then 3♠, which sounds like a splinter but is also 3OM. That usually means no ability to make a JS to spades after showing hearts as a splinter. Although I have not until now thought of it, it seems that the "solution" is for a jump to 4♥ to actually be a spade splinter and for 3♠ to show mild+ interest, as serious 3NT and LTTC can help a lot.

 

There is also another problem, though. Whereas a transfer to spades and then 3♥ allows a trump cue (3♠), a cue in the other suit (4♥, if not LTTC), and serious 3NT, the OM 3♠ call, with hearts agrees, preempts the ability to make any trump cue and preempts the ability to make any spade cue. Perhaps 3NT by Opener should not be a serious 3NT but rather a spade cue?

 

Also, this suggests to me that somewhat aggressive super-acceptances of transfers to hearts makes sense. I use 2NT as a 3-card super-accept (two of top three honors in hearts and primes outside) because of this.