Open this hand??

[KamalK]

[hv=d=e&v=e&n=sa852hada642caqj6&w=s96hk6djt87ckt832&e=s73hqjt87dq953c54&s=skqjt4h95432dkc97]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

 -     -     Pass  Pass

 Pass  1♣    Pass  1♠

 Pass  4♠    Pass  Pass

 Pass  

 

Hello Friends,

 

I am an Intermediate level player.

 

I was South and we were dealt this hand in an ACBL tourney. I passed because I discounted points for the singleton K♦. Could not even open weak weak 2♠ because of my ♥ holding.

 

We made 4♠+3 on a ♦lead.

 

Please advise :

 

1. Was my Pass correct by discounting value for K♦?

 

2. It was suggested I should "open something maybe even weak2". Is that correct?

 

3. After I showed ♠ should my partner have bid 4NT for RKC?

 

4. Any other suggestions please?

 

Thanks in advance. Warm regards

 

Kamal

[rogerclee]

1) You have a very clear initial pass.

2) Your partner should have splintered into hearts to better describe his hand to you instead of bidding 4♠. Splintering into a singleton A is not perfect, but I think it is a better description than 4♠.

3) I think you are worth 4NT over 4♥. Over 4♠ I would just pass (like you did).

[han]

I would not open your hand. I think your partner should bid 4H even though he has an ace.

[jillybean]

Agree , North has to find a bid other than 4♠, I like a 4♥ splinter.

[andy_h]

Agree with the initial pass and that N has to find a stronger bid than 4S. Like others have suggested, splintering in hearts would be the only viable (and good) option.

[KamalK]

Many thanks to all for the valuable inputs.

 

Regards

 

Kamal

[jtfanclub]

I would vote for 3♦ over 1♠. I don't like the splinter here, because of the ace and because I want partner to know that diamond honors are good things.

 

I just...I dunno. Both 3♦ and 4♥ are small lies.

[matmat]

I would vote for 3♦ over 1♠. I don't like the splinter here, because of the ace and because I want partner to know that diamond honors are good things.

 

I just...I dunno. Both 3♦ and 4♥ are small lies.

yes

3d is a tiny little lie

that shows 4 spades and diamond shortness, which, we are very close to having.

[rbforster]

After P-1♣-1♠, 2♥ would be a reverse so 3♥ should be a splinter in support of spades by North. This will leave enough space to explore for slam so I think is a good choice. When there are 2 splinter choices (3♥ and 4♥ here), the higher is often used to show a void.

[jtfanclub]

I would vote for 3♦ over 1♠.  I don't like the splinter here, because of the ace and because I want partner to know that diamond honors are good things. 

 

I just...I dunno.  Both 3♦ and 4♥ are small lies.

yes

3d is a tiny little lie

that shows 4 spades and diamond shortness, which, we are very close to having.

If you play 3♦ there as Splinter, then I would bid 2♦.

 

I don't know anybody who thinks 3♦ as Splinter there is SAYC, but whatever.

[matmat]

I would vote for 3♦ over 1♠.  I don't like the splinter here, because of the ace and because I want partner to know that diamond honors are good things. 

 

I just...I dunno.  Both 3♦ and 4♥ are small lies.

yes

3d is a tiny little lie

that shows 4 spades and diamond shortness, which, we are very close to having.

If you play 3♦ there as Splinter, then I would bid 2♦.

 

I don't know anybody who thinks 3♦ as Splinter there is SAYC, but whatever.

1. the OP didn't say SAYC, or 2/1 or whatever.

2. 2♦ is available as a reverse, which is forcing in sayc. if it was your intention to show a minor two suiter and then disclose spade support, good luck with that, p will never suspect you have a fourth trump and will not be able to make an intelligent decision. Lying about trump length is a thousand times worse than splintering with a stiff ace.

3. 3♦, if it is not a splinter in sayc, it is certainly undefined, and i don't think i know anyone playing a sayc or 2/1 related method who doesn't treat it as a splinter.

[rogerclee]

I would vote for 3♦ over 1♠.  I don't like the splinter here, because of the ace and because I want partner to know that diamond honors are good things. 

 

I just...I dunno.  Both 3♦ and 4♥ are small lies.

yes

3d is a tiny little lie

that shows 4 spades and diamond shortness, which, we are very close to having.

If you play 3♦ there as Splinter, then I would bid 2♦.

 

I don't know anybody who thinks 3♦ as Splinter there is SAYC, but whatever.

How is telling partner that you have a very strong 3145/4045 going to help him evaluate his hand better? This is what will happen if you start with a reverse.

[jtfanclub]

How is telling partner that you have a very strong 4045 going to help him evaluate his hand better? This is what will happen if you start with a reverse.

I agree that's what will happen if you start with a reverse.

 

I think it's much easier for partner to evaluate his diamonds if he thinks you have 4045 than if he thinks you have 41??. If partner has, say, a singleton diamond and three small clubs, it's very hard for him to evaluate the value of that singleton diamond. I don't know whether the singleton ace is closer to a void or a small singleton, but I think it accurately describes that you're worried about having two minor suit losers rather than a heart loser plus a minor suit loser.

 

I could probably be convinced the Splinter was better.

[matmat]

I think it's much easier for partner to evaluate his diamonds if he thinks you have 4045 than if he thinks you have 41??.

except you will not be able to resolve 3145 vs 4045 if p rebids spades

 

1c - 1s

2d - 2s

3s - 4s

now what?

[cherdano]

1C 1S 2D absolutely denies 4 spades for me (and probably everyone i know).

 

I also don't understand the point about the singleton diamond, why does its value change dramatically depending on whether opener has 3 or 4 diamonds (esp. given the fact that we either only have a 4-4 fit, or responder has the hand with the long trumps).

[mike777]

very interesting thread.

 

I can understand not wanting to splinter into a stiff Ace of H. The other problem is this is a bit too good for 4s....tough hand.

[jtfanclub]

1C 1S 2D absolutely denies 4 spades for me (and probably everyone i know).

 

I also don't understand the point about the singleton diamond, why does its value change dramatically depending on whether opener has 3 or 4 diamonds (esp. given the fact that we either only have a 4-4 fit, or responder has the hand with the long trumps).

What if he doesn't have 3 or for 4 diamonds? What if he has 4126?

 

To be honest, with all four hands in front of me, it's easy to say "Well, of course I'd bid 4NT over 4♥". But I think it's a borderline decision, and I think it would be very difficult, to say the least, to find the slam if responder had:

 

KQJT

9543

K2

974

 

Does that look like a 4NT bid to you? How about if I remove a heart and add a club?

 

OK, so back to 1♣-1M-2♦. What if you didn't have splinter available?

 

A842

AK

K64

AJT6

 

Assuming you don't open this 2NT, what do you say after 1♠?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

#1 / 2 Pass, if someone suggest opening, besides a two suited opening

stop listening.

You have 9HCP, distribution does not count, add 2 points for length

(one length is just rubbish), if you really have to, that leaves you at

11 points at best, one point short of opening strength.

Even the rule of 20 does not recomment opening, and the rule is not

known for underbidding (and counting the King as full value is violating

the intention of the rule, even Bergen will agree with this statement.)

 

#3 Openers 4S bid is fine as well, if you dont like a splinter bid in a

suit you hold the singleton Ace.

4S showes something like 19HCP and a semibal. shape, which is

close enough.

 

#4 Pass is fine as well, it depends to a huge degree on style, does your

partner stretches a lot to bid game, or does he alway have his values.

 

As it is, I would not worry to much about missing 6S, no wastage, the

shortages work as well.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[cherdano]

I am not sure what your point is JT. With 4126, partner would usually bid 4♣ over 1♠. With a balanced hand that is worth a game force, he of course bids 4♠ over 1♠. Are you suggestion to reverse with 4234, so that your reverse-then-raise sequence now becomes ambiguous between 3145, 4045 and 4234? If a balanced hand is too good for 4♠, it is either worth a 2N opener, or you are bidding 4♠ over 1♠ too often.

[matmat]

To be honest, with all four hands in front of me, it's easy to say "Well, of course I'd bid 4NT over 4♥". ?

well

the thing is, that 3♥ should be a splinter, as Rob points out, and you have plenty of room to cue

[jtfanclub]

To be honest, with all four hands in front of me, it's easy to say "Well, of course I'd bid 4NT over 4♥".  ?

well

the thing is, that 3♥ should be a splinter, as Rob points out, and you have plenty of room to cue

Well, if you're playing 3♥ here as a splinter, then all your worries are over.

[jtfanclub]

I am not sure what your point is JT.

No, you're right, I'm confusing myself. Sorry.

 

I'm used to 3♦ here, when not agreed upon as something else, as being GF setting spades as trump and with some diamonds, so it could be 4234 for example. But then somebody else chimed in that this was Splinter, so we got onto the reverse. But my answer was still thinking about the 3♦ call. I apologize.

 

I guess everybody's playing everything as Splinters these days. But that means that you get to bid 4♠ with, well, a lot of different hands. I don't know what 4♣ is, but I guess I wouldn't think it was 4126.

 

I dunno, this whole thing seems goofy to me. A jump is Splinter except when it isn't Splinter and it means what I want it to mean, until I decide that it should mean something different....

 

For those of you who use 3♦ as Splinter, what are you using 4♦ for? Even More Splintery? Splintific? Surely there's more to life than Splinters.

[matmat]

I'm used to 3♦ here, when not agreed upon as something else, as being GF setting spades as trump and with some diamonds, so it could be 4234 for example.

let me get this straight... you object to 3♦, 3♥ being used as splinters, because it is "not part of sayc." And then you whip out a treatment where it shows a second suit and a 4 card fit? can you show me where in the description of SAYC that particular method is described?

[jtfanclub]

I'm used to 3♦ here, when not agreed upon as something else, as being GF setting spades as trump and with some diamonds, so it could be 4234 for example.

let me get this straight... you object to 3♦, 3♥ being used as splinters, because it is "not part of sayc." And then you whip out a treatment where it shows a second suit and a 4 card fit? can you show me where in the description of SAYC that particular method is described?

This is what it says:

------------------------------------------------------------

With a maximum hand (19-21 or 22 points) opener must make a very strong

rebid:

Jump in notrump;

Double jump raise in responder's suit or double jump rebid of opener's

suit;

Jump shift in a new suit.

------------------------------------------------------------

 

1♣-1♠-3♦ shows a very strong hand with clubs and diamonds. It doesn't say that it sets spades as trump, so let's suppose it doesn't.

 

So in SAYC, the proposed auction would go:

 

1♣-1♠-3♦-3♥/3NT-4♠.

or

1♣-1♠-3♦-3♠-4♥ if you think partner can figure that one out, or 4♠ if you don't.

 

At this point, it should be fairly clear what you have: a very strong hand that could not Splinter, but really likes spades. And has clubs, and diamonds, with clubs either longer or stronger than diamonds.

 

I apologize that I am not writing with my usual coherence. But strong jump shifts by opener were designed to handle this hole, for hands that are too strong to jump to game but aren't appropriate for Splinter. You can shove those into reverses, but then it's very difficult to show your support properly.

 

I guess the spade support to me was assumed. There's no hand I can think of where I'd open 1♣ and be too strong to reverse to 2♦ which doesn't have my partner's suit. If I could force us game at the 5 level when my P has shown no points and no fit, I would open it 2♣.

 

Damn, now I get thrown into the sun again.

[rogerclee]

jtfanclub, just wow. I am not even going to be mean, but you should reconsider what you understand about bridge bidding fundamentals.