Serious and Non-Serious Splinters

[jmc]

In my area there are several good pairs playing 2 types of splinters as follows.

 

1M- 3 of the other major is a concealed non-serious splinter

1M- 3NT serious splinter in the other major

1M- 4c, 4d serious splinter in the minor

1M- 4 of the other Major is to play

 

Do any of you play this?

What do you think of the method?

Could you give examples of a serious vs. non-serious splinter?

Appreciate any comments, etc.

 

jmc

[cherdanno]

I play s.th. like this. Non-serious splinter would typically be 10-12 hcp, assuming a typical 5431 shape - maybe a slam unsuitable 13 too. Good splinters would be about 13-15.

Don't ask automatically when partner shows the non-serious splinter - sometimes you can just rckb and tell them dummy's shortness before the lead. Obviously, don't sign off opposite the good splinter just because you have wastage - as always, try to imagine typical hands.

[awm]

From Ron Klinger's book, the guideline is that when there's a singleton and a good fit, you need about 27 "working points" for slam to be reasonable. So the idea is for the splinter bid to both describe the shortness (so opener can determine which points are working) and the general strength (so opener can decide whether enough points are there). Basically:

 

(1) Non-serious splinter says that opener needs a working maximum to make slam. Typical range is something like 10-12 hcp (this is a GF when you add the points for the shortage of course), so that opener with 12-14 even if "all values are well placed" is not really in the slam range.

 

(2) Serious splinter says that a working minimum (or most maximums) will be a reasonable slam. Typical range is something like 13-15 hcp, so that opener with 12-14 and a "perfect" holding opposite the shortage could make slam.

 

Note that this structure also lets you conceal the shortage sometimes, in that after a non-serious splinter opener can just sign off when he's in the 12-14 range without asking the shortage.

 

Of course, all this stuff about points is a vague guideline; you still need to check that you have enough controls for slam and there are other details if opener is also unbalanced. You can make some very light slams with singletons in both hands and "perfect holdings" opposite.

[aguahombre]

Depends on how many bids which might have better uses you are willing to give up. 2/1 players can have their splinters all be limited to game values including the distribution points --and can bid around the shortness with "serious splinter" values, since they create game force early and can go slow.

 

that doesn't mean the suggestions here are not good ones, it just means they might not be necessary for some partnerships.

[cherdanno]

Depends on how many bids which might have better uses you are willing to give up. 2/1 players can have their splinters all be limited to game values including the distribution points --and can bid around the shortness with "serious splinter" values, since they create game force early and can go slow.

Except you can never show 4-card support when you do this - often crucial for opener's evaluation.

[MFA]

I have had some spectacular bottoms with the unspecified splinters, but I'm still playing them. Hopefully the good boards will come.

 

Last time it came up, I had a very suitable opening hand with 2641, almost a textbook slam hand opposite a splinter. 1♥-p-3♠-(4♠).

 

So I keycarded and ended up in a noplay 6♥. Partner of course had a singleton ... club!

[Phil]

I've never seen the wisdom of a strong splinter gobbling up 3 levels of bidding space, but the idea of concealed splinters makes sense.

 

Plus I prefer 3N as a 'good raise to 4 of a major' which you lose playing 2 way splinters.

 

I do prefer 2 way splinters to using void splinters however, which are very rare.

[Jlall]

I like 2 way splinters in a non strong club system. Agree with 10-12 and 13-15 as the general range.

[jmc]

What do you prefer in a club system?

[Trinidad]

Since opener is limited, you don't need the non serious splinter in a strong club system. With a non serious splinter hand, you just bid game. Opener is not going to have a nice fitting hand with 17 points.

 

Rik

[glen]

I prefer a non-serious approach involving multi-way splinters. For example here is the 34 way out spade splinter:

 

1H-2S (multi-way S splinter)

2NT asks:

--3C Ways 22-34, 3D asks

----3H Ways 30-34, 3S asks

------3NT Ways 33-34, 4C asks

--------4D: Way 33

--------4H: Way 34

------4C: Way 30

------4D: Way 31

------4H: Way 32

----3S Ways 27-29, 3NT asks

------4C: Way 27

------4D: Way 28

------4H: Way 29

----3NT Ways 25-26, 4C asks

------4D: Way 25

------4H: Way 26

----4C: Way 22

----4D: Way 23

----4H: Way 24

--3D Ways 14-21, 3H asks

----3S Ways 19-21, 3NT asks

------4C: Way 19

------4D: Way 20

------4H: Way 21

----3NT Ways 17-18, 4C asks

------4D: Way 17

------4H: Way 18

----4C: Way 14

----4D: Way 15

----4H: Way 16

--3H Ways 9-13, 3S asks

----3NT Ways 12-13, 4C asks

------4D: Way 12

------4H: Way 13

----4C: Way 9

----4D: Way 10

----4H: Way 11

--3S Ways 6-8, 3NT asks

----4C: Way 6

----4D: Way 7

----4H: Way 8

--3NT Ways 4-5, 4C asks

----4D: Way 4

----4H: Way 5

--4C: Way 1

--4D: Way 2

--4H: Way 3

[fromageGB]

I prefer a non-serious approach involving multi-way splinters.

Nice one :)

[fromageGB]

I don't like the idea of giving up useful bids to show different splinter types. The normal "less than opening values" splinter is OK, and a "splinter" with opening values we incorporate into the 2NT reply to 1♠, sort of "Josephy, son of Jacoby". 1♠ 2NT, or 1♥ 2♠ (ie 2M+1) is the game forcing shortage inquiry with 4 card support. Opener bids a shortage and whether singleton or void, if he has one. If not, he bids the next step.

 

Responder then over that next step shows his shortage in the same way, if he has one. If not, if he is not minimal he bids an otherwise unused 3M+1 (ie this is not a shortage reply) to ask for opener's general strength in steps.

 

If either partner shows his shortage, the other hand re-evaluates in the light of that shortage and shows his "useful points".

 

Of course either side can break the sequences with hands that know what other action to take, and the fact that 2M+1 is the shortage ask, 3M+1 is the strength ask, and 4M+1 is the ace ask, makes it easy to remember. So this multi-purpose "Josephy" means you don't need the other stronger splinters.

[qwery_hi]

I prefer a non-serious approach involving multi-way splinters. For example here is the 34 way out spade splinter:

 

1H-2S (multi-way S splinter)

2NT asks:

--3C Ways 22-34, 3D asks

----3H Ways 30-34, 3S asks

------3NT Ways 33-34, 4C asks

--------4D: Way 33

--------4H: Way 34

------4C: Way 30

------4D: Way 31

------4H: Way 32

----3S Ways 27-29, 3NT asks

------4C: Way 27

------4D: Way 28

------4H: Way 29

----3NT Ways 25-26, 4C asks

------4D: Way 25

------4H: Way 26

----4C: Way 22

----4D: Way 23

----4H: Way 24

--3D Ways 14-21, 3H asks

----3S Ways 19-21, 3NT asks

------4C: Way 19

------4D: Way 20

------4H: Way 21

----3NT Ways 17-18, 4C asks

------4D: Way 17

------4H: Way 18

----4C: Way 14

----4D: Way 15

----4H: Way 16

--3H Ways 9-13, 3S asks

----3NT Ways 12-13, 4C asks

------4D: Way 12

------4H: Way 13

----4C: Way 9

----4D: Way 10

----4H: Way 11

--3S Ways 6-8, 3NT asks

----4C: Way 6

----4D: Way 7

----4H: Way 8

--3NT Ways 4-5, 4C asks

----4D: Way 4

----4H: Way 5

--4C: Way 1

--4D: Way 2

--4H: Way 3

What do 'WayXX' and 'WayX' mean in this post?

[fromageGB]

I prefer a non-serious approach involving multi-way splinters.  For example here is the 34 way out spade splinter:

What do 'WayXX' and 'WayX' mean in this post?

In the non-serious splinter, way 27 would be a specific 4441 shape, with a singleton club, but having no diamond honours. Way 28 would be the same 4441 but guaranteeing at least the diamond king.

 

Unfortunately, there is no way to show all the possible ways, but if you did that, it would turn into a serious splinter, and that negates its value.

[glen]

What do 'WayXX' and 'WayX' mean in this post?

Its quite complex - the 2NT ask shows at least two of the top three hearts (someday somebody will write some book about this) - now responder's replies depend on whether responder is certain opener has the trump ace or not. This caused this at the club:

 

After 1♥-2♠;2NT-4♥

 

Opponent: What was two spades please?

Novice partner: A spade singleton or void, heart fit, any strength

Opponent: What was four hearts please?

Novice partner: Way One

Opponent: Weight Juan?

Novice partner: Yes

Opponent: What's a Weight Juan?

Novice partner: Its not away won, its way one

Opponent: What does it show?

Novice partner: Depends if my partner is certain I have the trump ace or not

Opponent: Why does that matter?

Novice partner: The replies are encrypted

Opponent: Encrypted replies, is that legal?

Novice partner: Don't know, just started playing bridge last week

Opponent: What does it mean if you have the trump ace?

Novice partner: I don't remember, there are thirty four encrypted replies

Opponent: What if you don't have the trump ace, what does it mean?

Novice partner: I don't remember

Opponent: But it is Weight Juan?

Me: Director, the opponent is asking questions in a supercilious tone!

Opponent: What is supercilious?

Me: Its cilious, but better

Opponent: Director, I was non cilious!

TD: Dummy is not allowed to call the director

Opponent: I'm not the dummy!

TD: And you don't know what supercilious means?

Novice partner: I going to take up Scrabble, it only has seven letters, unecrypted too!

[Jlall]

What do you prefer in a club system?

Meckwell play 1M 3N as choice of games, and 1 way splinters (but can show a hand too strong for a normal splinter after a 2N raise). I played that with 1 pard, and with another I am playing direct splinters as void showing and the unspecified splinter as singleton.

 

If I had to put a range on these I would say a good 12 to a bad 15. In reality I would just think is slam good opposite some well fitting hands with a max of 15 and splinter accordingly.