splinter too committal?

[wank]

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=sqj87haqjdkq843c2]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

1D from p, RHO overcalls 2C.

 

what do you bid here? if you X and p bids 2H over that, is 4D forcing?

 

assume you're playing 5542 openings and strong NT. would it affect your choice if you're playing 1D as unbalanced (i.e. 5+ unbal unless 4441)?

 

don't bother telling me about your pet convention - it's a judgement question.

 

fwiw, i didn't have the hand but i was asked my opinion.

[gwnn]

i think you may start with double to look for spades since you're so strong. you can then later bid diamonds over almost all levels of club preemption. if they bid 6♣ then you will x and that will hardly be a bad result.

[karlson]

If the diamond is unbalanced, I would splinter. Of course it's possible that 4♠ will be better than 5♦, but I think it's reasonable unlikely. 6♦ on the other hand looks like a very real target, and this is the most direct route to try to get there.

 

One of the things I started doing more playing unbalanced diamond is suppressing a major in order to raise diamonds, and it's worked out quite well every time I can remember. On the other hand, the difference in expected diamond length is not actually all that great, so I'm starting to think that maybe people don't do this enough even playing standard. I think playing standard, this hand is just barely not strong enough, so I would still double, but I think it's close and I would definitely consider 4c more now than I did before.

[kenrexford]

If the diamond is unbalanced, I would splinter. Of course it's possible that 4♠ will be better than 5♦, but I think it's reasonable unlikely. 6♦ on the other hand looks like a very real target, and this is the most direct route to try to get there.

 

One of the things I started doing more playing unbalanced diamond is suppressing a major in order to raise diamonds, and it's worked out quite well every time I can remember. On the other hand, the difference in expected diamond length is not actually all that great, so I'm starting to think that maybe people don't do this enough even playing standard. I think playing standard, this hand is just barely not strong enough, so I would still double, but I think it's close and I would definitely consider 4c more now than I did before.

VERY good analysis. I have played unbalanced diamond for about 20 years, and suppressing majors is often extremely rewarding. I had the same thoughts, therefore, to the T as what you wrote.

[aguahombre]

Well, since OP suggested he was not interested in pet gadgets, and 1D, even though showing 4 of them, is not necessarily unbalanced -- I will give my answers to what was asked:

 

Yes, x then jump to 4D should be forcing.

Yes, that is what I would do.

Yes, the same if 1D=5+ unbalanced or 4 4 4 1.

 

P.s., suppressing a 4cM, though probably brilliant, is not something I am ready to do. Perhaps the implication that I have 4 spades will be useful to partner later in the auction.

[the hog]

Anything but double looking for a 4-4 S fit is playing with yourself - in both forms of the expression.

4D after a x is certainly forcing.

[Cyberyeti]

I think playing standard you have to X.

 

Not really a pet gadget, but we play inverted minors still on over the overcall and may conceal a 4 card major, so have no problem with this hand.

[MinorKid]

I think 4♣ is better.

[Fluffy]

and does 4♦/♣ guarantee 4♠? I think so btut probably someone can find an exception

[phil_20686]

i think you may start with double to look for spades since you're so strong. you can then later bid diamonds over almost all levels of club preemption. if they bid 6♣ then you will x and that will hardly be a bad result.

Suppose the auction goes:

 

1d 2c x 4c

4h P ?

 

Have i lost the ability to make a slam try in diamond? If i now bid 4s is that suggest a slam trty with spades and diamonds? or just agree hearts? I guess hwat you expect for 4h here depends a lot on what you would dble with and how aggressive your style is.

 

ALso, i dont really agree that you dble and then later bid 4d and its obviously a slam try. (obviously in some auctions it is), but if partner passed in the above auction I think you are forced into dbling again. Partner could still have 4 spades for his pass, and when he has a minimum balanced hand that is the strongest argument to play in spades. I would think that 4d here just shows a hand that for whatever reason is not preparet to stand 4cx. Maybe 6-4 with aggressive cards. I.e., i would think that:

 

1d 2c x 4c

p p 4d p

4M

 

is natural and still just looking for the best game.

 

Probably when you bid 4c you will sometimes reach an inferior game. But i suspect that if you dble, and if partner does have spades, you will often reach an inferior slam. Further, there must be gains from the improved accuracy of the slam bidding if you start with a slam move now. I would be much more inclinced to dble If i was a bit weaker. Here I think i have enough that 5d should be at least as good as 4s. So i will make a slam move with 4c.

[Fluffy]

Suppose the auction goes:

 

1d 2c x 4c

4h P ?

 

Have i lost the ability to make a slam try in diamond? If i now bid 4s is that suggest a slam trty with spades and diamonds? or just agree hearts? I guess hwat you expect for 4h here depends a lot on what you would dble with and how aggressive your style is.

4♥ must be a 2 suiter to have diamonds as a support spot in case hearts ain't the correct one. Now we know we have alarge diamond fit, but we are missing 5 keycards (♠AK ♥K ♦A ♣A). Maybe partner has singleton spade, but trying for slam its kinda complicated now. Preempts work.

[hanp]

I would bid 4C over any 1D opening that shows 4 diamonds. The hand is so good that I'll risk missing a spade game to optimize my chances of finding a good diamond slam.

 

With such strong hearts it doesn't seem likely that 6S in a 4-4 is going to be much better than 6D in the 5-4.

[ajm218]

The actual auction was:

 

1♦ (2♣) x P

2♥ (3♣) 4♦ P

?

 

Seems the consensus here is that 4♣ would agree ♥s and 4♦ is forcing showing ♦ and ♠? 3♦ would be inv therefore?

[Fluffy]

3 ♦ would be NF, but competitive rather than invitational (4243 for example), with the invitational you might prefer another double.

[aguahombre]

The actual auction was:

 

1♦ (2♣) x P

2♥ (3♣) 4♦ P

?

 

Seems the consensus here is that 4♣ would agree ♥s and 4♦ is forcing showing ♦ and ♠? 3♦ would be inv therefore?

I think so. And 4H would also show hearts :rolleyes: