jillybean Posted September 11, 2009 Report Share Posted September 11, 2009 [hv=d=s&v=n&s=s8xxhk9xdkqjxxxc8]133|100|Scoring: MP2♦ (P) 2♥ (P)?[/hv] I checked, the minors are correct :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted September 11, 2009 Report Share Posted September 11, 2009 you can bid 4♣ showing a 3 card fit, shortness and a maximum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted September 11, 2009 Report Share Posted September 11, 2009 [hv=d=s&v=n&s=s8xxhk9xdkqjxxxc8]133|100|Scoring: MP2♦ (P) 2♥ (P)?[/hv] I checked, the minors are correct :P and no child abuse? :) 3♥ you only need to show support not bid game :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted September 11, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2009 you can bid 4♣ showing a 3 card fit, shortness and a maximum And because the opps haven't bid you are not concerned that partner may have a weakish hand in ♥'s with no diamond tolerance? 4♣ is a spunky bid, I like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted September 11, 2009 Report Share Posted September 11, 2009 I am not responsible for partner's misbids, not even if they're a minor :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted September 11, 2009 Report Share Posted September 11, 2009 Like 4C, but am not familiar with weak two in diamonds, and whether responder goes out of his way to find a major suit fit with questonable values to compensate. Even with that lack of knowledge, I don't think I care on this hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted September 11, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2009 you can bid 4♣ showing a 3 card fit, shortness and a maximum And because the opps haven't bid you are not concerned that partner may have a weakish hand in ♥'s with no diamond tolerance? 4♣ is a spunky bid, I like it. When I asked my mentor this, he said; Partner should not have a weakish hand in hearts – ‘rescuing’ a weak 2 bid before it is doubled with a weak hand is rarely a good idea. And there should be some diamond tolerance (obviously not as strong as in this hand), unless partner is sure the hand will not be played in diamonds, ie sure he will bid 3H if partner rebids 3D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted September 11, 2009 Report Share Posted September 11, 2009 There is a slight problem with the splinter, IMO. Consider two possible hands for Opener: 1. xxx-Kxx-KQJxxx-x2. xxx-Qxx-AKxxxx-x On the latter, Opener has a huge hand for partner. A trump honor to possibly solidify the honors there, a stiff, and two quicks in diamonds. On the former, actual hand, Opener has the same solidification in hearts, and the same stiff, but the diamond contribution is very hesitant. Give partner even a void in diamonds, and the former creates two quick pitches for, say, Axx in spades. The latter does not help much. I would reserve the splinter for this type of situation -- top-heavy diamonds. However, it is easier for me, because I play that a 2NT rebid (2♦-P-2M-P-2NT) shows a "good raise", whereas 3M shows a "bad raise." This allows more space to further explore contracts when the major will be raised. That said, a reasonable method here would be for a LTTC to ask for the raise type, if discussed and agreed. Thus: 2♦-P-2♥-P-4♣ would show either type. 4♦ LTTC by Responder would ask Opener to bid on if he has the pure tricks scenario (xxx-Qxx-AKxxxx-x) but to sign off with the fit-dependent type (xxx-Kxx-KQJxxx-x). This works fine, as Responder won't care and will know anyway when he has a diamond honor. This won't help, though, in the one situation when the stiff is immediately below the agreed major (2♦-P-2♠-P-4♥). In that situation, though, Opener could bid 4♦ to show the specific hand of stiff heart and fit-dependent hearts but 4♥ with the stiff heart and diamond quicks. Of course, you might then ask about AQJxxx. Figure that one out yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONEferBRID Posted September 11, 2009 Report Share Posted September 11, 2009 [hv=d=s&v=n&s=s8xxhk9xdkqjxxxc8]133|100|Scoring: MP2♦ (P) 2♥ (P)?[/hv] 2D - 2H??2NT! = x x x tripleton or A x, K x, Q x honor-doubleton3H = honor-tripletonif none of the above, then2S = Sp feature ( A or K; if agreed may also be Q )3C = Cl feature,( etc )3D = none of the above3NT= A K Q x x x Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted September 11, 2009 Report Share Posted September 11, 2009 [hv=d=s&v=n&s=s8xxhk9xdkqjxxxc8]133|100|Scoring: MP2♦ (P) 2♥ (P)?[/hv] 2D - 2H??2NT! = x x x tripleton or A x, K x, Q x honor-doubleton3H = honor-tripletonif none of the above, then2S = Sp feature ( A or K; if agreed may also be Q )3C = Cl feature,( etc )3D = none of the above3NT= A K Q x x x That works, too. You could still have splinters for the wildly great hands. With the hesitant, fit-dependent splinters, you would bid 2NT or 3M as appropriate and then partner could make some relay asking for a possible stiff. 2♦-2♥-4♣ = power splinter (4♦ LTTC asking for trump honor)2♦-2♥-3♥-3♠(relay)-4♣ = Hxx, fit-dependent splinter2♦-2♥-2NT-3♣(relay)-4♣ = xxx, fit-dependent splinter2♦-2♥-2NT-3♣(relay)-3♦(Hx)-3♠(relay)-4♣ = Hx, fit-dependent splinter2♦-2♥-2NT-3♣(relay)-3♥(Hx, power splinter somewhere)-3♠(where)-4♣ = Hx, power splinter This way, Opener could show: Hx with a stiff and AKxxxx in diamondsHx with a stiff and KQJxxx in diamondsxxx with a stiff and KQJxxx in diamondsHxx with a stiff and AKxxxx in diamondsHxx with a stiff and KQJxxx in diamondsxxx with a stiff and AKxxxx in diamonds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted September 12, 2009 Report Share Posted September 12, 2009 you can bid 4♣ showing a 3 card fit, shortness and a maximum And because the opps haven't bid you are not concerned that partner may have a weakish hand in ♥'s with no diamond tolerance? 4♣ is a spunky bid, I like it. When I asked my mentor this, he said; Partner should not have a weakish hand in hearts – ‘rescuing’ a weak 2 bid before it is doubled with a weak hand is rarely a good idea. And there should be some diamond tolerance (obviously not as strong as in this hand), unless partner is sure the hand will not be played in diamonds, ie sure he will bid 3H if partner rebids 3D. I would say it more simply. 2♥ is forcing with game interest. Diamond tolerance is likely but not promised. With a 23 count and a singleton diamond you can't pass... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONEferBRID Posted September 12, 2009 Report Share Posted September 12, 2009 Ken... how would it go with a stiff Spade ? That was the easy question. Now, how would it work for2♦ - 2♠ ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel_k Posted September 12, 2009 Report Share Posted September 12, 2009 I agree with Cherdanno - 2♥ is forcing with game interest. There may even be hands where partner bids 2♥ and then passes 3♦ with a void, eg AQxx AQxxx - Kxxx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted September 12, 2009 Report Share Posted September 12, 2009 Ken... how would it go with a stiff Spade ? That was the easy question. Now, how would it work for2♦ - 2♠ ? Let's see. Stiff spade first. 2♦-2♥-? 2NT = Hx or xxx. 3♣ asks. 3♦ Hx; 3♥ asks for stiff; 3♠ stiff spade. 3♠ direct after 3♣ fit-dependent stiff. 3♥ after 3♣ power splinter xxx support; 3♠ asks; 3NT stiff spade. 3♥ = Hxx; 3♠ asks; 3NT stiff spade. 3♠ = immediate power splinter. Next issue. Spades. 2♦-2♠-? Same basic structure. 4-bids power. 3♠ Hxx; 3NT asks. 2NT with the relays and asks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted September 12, 2009 Report Share Posted September 12, 2009 wow...that is neat but gave this old guy a headache. think I will stick with mini roman 2D so I don't have to think. :lol: but it sure seems like it works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONEferBRID Posted September 12, 2009 Report Share Posted September 12, 2009 wow...that is neat but gave this old guy a headache....... but it sure seems like it works. Ditto ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts