Anything to see here?

[ajm218]

[hv=d=s&n=skjtxxxhakxdxxxxc&w=shdc&e=shdc&s=saxxxhxdajxcaktxx]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

1♣ 1♠

3♥ 4♠

[kenrexford]

The splinter is not a tool that says, "Bid slam if you have no wasted points here." It is a tool that says, "I have stuff and shortness here -- evaluate."

 

In other words, I think North over-reacted to the "wasted values" in hearts, especially as these values were not actually wasted.

 

The fact remains that North, who would typically have about a 10-loser minimum for a response, has just heard a GF and is looking at a 6-loser hand. To go from 3♥ all the way to 4♠ under these circumstances is a wild underbid.

 

What to do as North depends on your style, of course.

[Cyberyeti]

Spooky parallels to the hand I posted shortly before, I think I'd be more likely to bid the inferior but not stupidly bad 7 than miss 6.

 

4♠ is closer to the same hand without the ♥AK.

 

4♥ is not silly as with the version of keycard I play, I can now respond 6♣ to 4N to show 2 "aces", the Q♠ (or 6th one) and a void club, and just cue 5♣ as a definitive shortage over 4♠ (I'd have bid 4♣ with a club high card).

 

The auction I'd have on these hands would be:

 

1♣-1♠

2N (GF unbalanced)-3♣ (semi forced)

4♥ (4135/4126)-4N (RKC)

5♣ (0/3)-5♠ (signoff, partner will bid again with 3)

6♣ (3 and the K♣)-6♥ (K♥, not K♦, prob not too worried about Q♠)

6 or 7 ♠

 

7♠ is not a bad shot opposite hands with less diamonds and more hearts or clubs, although I think partner can work this out in a lot of cases so will have bid 7♠ a lot of the time it's right. On that basis (Kxxxxx, AKxx, xx, x is an easy 7♠ bid) I'd settle for 6♠.

[jdonn]

4♠?!? Is this an atb? 100% north? How about 4♥, then 5♣ or 5♥ or something over a sign off.

[pooltuna]

4♠?!? Is this an atb? 100% north? How about 4♥, then 5♣ or 5♥ or something over a sign off.

you have some objection to ...4♣ 4♦;4♥...

[cherdanno]

4♠?!? Is this an atb? 100% north? How about 4♥, then 5♣ or 5♥ or something over a sign off.

you have some objection to ...4♣ 4♦;4♥...

I do.

[jdonn]

4♠?!? Is this an atb? 100% north? How about 4♥, then 5♣ or 5♥ or something over a sign off.

you have some objection to ...4♣ 4♦;4♥...

Yes. Although the best option might be 5♣ exclusion if partner will understand it, which I doubt mine would.

[ArtK78]

4♠?!? Is this an atb? 100% north? How about 4♥, then 5♣ or 5♥ or something over a sign off.

you have some objection to ...4♣ 4♦;4♥...

Yes. Although the best option might be 5♣ exclusion if partner will understand it, which I doubt mine would.

OK - I will bite.

 

What could 5♣ be if not exclusion? Splinter over a splinter? Fit showing? Super Gerber?

 

Seriously, though, it has to be exclusion.

[Jlall]

Don't understand what's wrong with 4C just to check that partner can bid 4D. It is definitely possible partner has no diamond control.

 

Also is 3H a non GF splinter or a GF splinter? North can slam force opp a GF splinter if partner has a diamond control. If 3H could be like a 13 count with a stiff heart obviously north cannot slam force.

 

Perhaps the problem here was south thought 3H showed GF values and north thought it showed less than that (else 4H). The south hand is worth a GF splinter so playing mini splinters 4H would be better.

[aguahombre]

One of our frequent posters stated recently that he denies any prime card in the unbid suit when he splinters. I would suggest to whoever would use exclusion 5C on this auction find out who that was --and not use exclusion with this holding if you are playing with him.

[jdonn]

Ok well I apologize for getting caught in a discussion of the followups, since the main point to be learned here is north is not only too good to fail to investigate slam, but way too good. Investigate however you like.

 

I think the beginning of Ken's post is very good as to how to look at splinters.

[Phil]

4♠ makes me heave. I see people go overboard discounting cards in the splinter suit but here its very likely pard is 4135 (no 1♦ opener (lets not go there)) so the ♥K is a nice card not a negative.

 

Considering you need ♠Axxx ♥x ♦Axx as a base for slam to be good, 4♠ is quite wrong.

 

I prefer 4♣ even if I am playing non serious 3N since it compels pard to show the diamond card.

[ajm218]

I was South and would have bid 4♥ as N i think. Was interested to here what people thought about the merits of 4♣ vs 4♥ - what should the auction be if South has:

 

AJxx

x

Kxx

AKQJx

 

?

[jjbrr]

I was South and would have bid 4♥ as N i think. Was interested to here what people thought about the merits of 4♣ vs 4♥ - what should the auction be if South has:

 

AJxx

x

Kxx

AKQJx

 

?

Director. N and S both have ♠J

[kenrexford]

1♣-P-1M-P-4♣ usually shows a 6-4 hand, with solid clubs, at least as I understand the traditional definition.

[pooltuna]

1♣-P-1M-P-4♣ usually shows a 6-4 hand, with solid clubs, at least as I understand the traditional definition.

My understanding is different for the convention with no name. I was told it showed a "weak" 64 and was used primarily to distinguish the auction 1m 1M; 4M as a strong raise to game.

[mike777]

Prefer 4h rather than 3h splinter.

Now over 3h prefer 4h not 4s.

[kenrexford]

1♣-P-1M-P-4♣ usually shows a 6-4 hand, with solid clubs, at least as I understand the traditional definition.

My understanding is different for the convention with no name. I was told it showed a "weak" 64 and was used primarily to distinguish the auction 1m 1M; 4M as a strong raise to game.

Just curious -- why save space with the "weak" raise to game?

[pooltuna]

1♣-P-1M-P-4♣ usually shows a 6-4 hand, with solid clubs, at least as I understand the traditional definition.

My understanding is different for the convention with no name. I was told it showed a "weak" 64 and was used primarily to distinguish the auction 1m 1M; 4M as a strong raise to game.

Just curious -- why save space with the "weak" raise to game?

Never given it much thought since it doesn't happen often and most of the partner's I play with now are unfamiliar with it.

[dellache]

4♠ is a gross underbid. People usually tend to downgrade too much if they have "wasted" (actually, I think it's not even the case here) values facing shortness. They seem to ignore that splinters are mainly a tool for upgrading ("if all your KQJ are outside my shortness, please upgrade") rather than downgrading.

 

Here, even AK facing shortness looks good. If may allow to discard a diamond in partner's 2/3 cards, and ruff 2 diamonds in his hand (Axxx x Axx Axxxx is enough to score 12 tricks). It follows that even if you play minisplinters (apparently not the case looking at south's hand, unless another slight underbid) you should not sign off in 4S.

 

That being said, there are imho two problems to solve with North's hand : 1. do we miss D-control ? (unlikely but possible) and 2. how do we investigate 7 ?

 

The way to solve problem one is to bid 4H (4C should show a club honor, allowing pard to evaluate his 5+ card holding). Investigating 7 facing Axxx x AKx Axxxx (minisplinter) can be problematic now because pard will bid BW.

 

That's why over a GF splinter I would probably assume that 1. pard has a diamond CTRL, and 2. my problem is only 12 versus 13 tricks. And I may produce the "terrible" 4NT bid *myself* : the Ace of clubs is an important card, and I'm well placed to make a grand slam try if pard shows all missing KC. Over 5C I'll bid 5N, hoping to hear 6D (DK), or 7C (C-AKQ). Not very elegant, but practical.

--

dellache