Splinter or 2/1 GF

[Codo]

I don't life so far away from Roland, but here 2 Club followed by 4 Diamond shows typically a hand with 3 or 4 Hearts, short diamonds and good clubs.

 

Good to know that this is not so universal as I thought.

 

To the original question: Even if a splinter shows 11-14, my hand is too big, I bid 2 Clubs.

[han]

How will you be able to bid a delayed splinter for hearts after

 

1♥ - 2♣

2N

 

If you bid 4♦ now, your partner will not take it as a splinter for hearts; for clubs rather. At least I would.

I play that this shows a splinter or hearts. I vaguely remember Fred writing about such auctions in perhaps his "improving 2/1 GF" notes, I believe (but maybe someone can correct me) that he also plays it as a splinter for hearts.

 

However, I agree with you that you may not be able to show your shortness next, for example when partner bids 2D. And even when you can, it would show only 3-card support, not 4-card. (at least for me)

 

By the way, I made my vote for the splinter assuming 11-14 splinters. When playing 10-12 splinters I wouldn't bid it.

[Free]

2NT for me, 2nd choice 2♣. 4♦ is definitely not an alternative for me - (1) because I'm too strong and (2) because that shows a void in my methods.

Please read the question, 2NT is not an option on this hand, 4♦ doesn't show a void. I don't care about your methods on this hand, I usually play different things as well...

 

If you agreed to play multi, you won't open 2♦ with a ♦ weak two won't you?

[skjaeran]

2NT for me, 2nd choice 2♣. 4♦ is definitely not an alternative for me - (1) because I'm too strong and (2) because that shows a void in my methods.

Please read the question, 2NT is not an option on this hand, 4♦ doesn't show a void. I don't care about your methods on this hand, I usually play different things as well...

 

If you agreed to play multi, you won't open 2♦ with a ♦ weak two won't you?

I DID read the question.

 

I'll give you other reasons for bidding neither 2♣ nor 4♦. 4♦ won't help much, since partner is forced to rebid 4♥ both on hand where the 5-level is unsafe and on lots of hands where slam is a good proposition, see for exapmle dburn's post. 2♣ is better, but not a good option, since partner won't expect me to have 4-card support when I later support hearts. 2♣ is better than 4♦, since we're still able to get to slam with some sort of control of the auction.

 

However, you can't have intelligent slam investigation without a GF raise available. Or some very good agreements after bidding a new suit.

 

Multi, unlike Jacoby (or similar) is a convention you can manage without. In most partnerships Multi is in my agreements. A week 2♦ then is opened 1♦, 3♦ or pass then.

[inquiry]

2♣, it is not even close

[benlessard]

AKxxx is not just 2 tricks its a source of tricks.

 

Facing Qx youll make 4 or 5 tricks.

Facing Qxx youll make 5 or 4 tricks.

 

Facing xxx its 4 or 3 tricks.

Facing xxxx its 4 or 5 tricks.

 

To make a splinter or jacoby 2Nt with AKxxx in a side suit is a mistake ive stop doing 6 months after ive started playing bridge.

[kenrexford]

Because everyone diverges into all sorts of different sequences after a 2♣ start, assessing which is better without recognition of the "what next" problem seems silly.

 

I like 2♣ using my techniques.

 

I predict a HUGE likelihood of a 2♦ call. If so, I can bid 2♥ to establish fit. If partner cues 2♠, I will be able to cue 2NT to deny two top hearts. If partner then cues 3♣, I find out about the club Queen, which is nice. I can then, for instance, bypass 3♦ (denying thereby any of the top three diamonds) and 3♥ (thereby denying any of the top three trumps) to cue 3♠. If partner, knowing about the info exchanged so far, can bid serious 3NT, I can now cue 4♣ to show two top clubs. If he bids 4♦ as LTTC now, I can bid 5♦ to show acceptance and a stiff diamond, and my hand is on the table.

 

Other auctions work well for me as well.

 

I, therefore, contrast these auctions with the direct splinter. As noted by many, the splinter into diamonds leaves no space for LTTC, which is bad, and buries a potentially great trick source, which is also bad.

 

I'm not really impressed with the analysis of splinters by establishing ranges (12-14 or 14-16 or whatever), because "points" is so irrelevant to good slam bidding.

 

I can understand Jacoby 2NT, which has some appeal, as I do have Aces and Spaces. The problem, IMO, is that my hearts suck so badly. Jacoby 2NT robs us of trump cues in many sequences, which is bad when I have four small. However, this hand might very well be suitable for a specific rebid structure used by a particular partnership.

 

The summary is that which option depends on what predicted sequences will result from the selection of a specific auction and the tools enabled by each option in the partnership (and partner's strengths/weaknesses).

[cherdano]

2NT for me, 2nd choice 2♣. 4♦ is definitely not an alternative for me - (1) because I'm too strong and (2) because that shows a void in my methods.

Please read the question, 2NT is not an option on this hand, 4♦ doesn't show a void. I don't care about your methods on this hand, I usually play different things as well...

You really didn't have a GF (or limit+) raise available?