Doubles of Splinter Bids

[ArtK78]

I don't know if this has been discussed at any length on these Fora.

 

What is the current expert thought on the meaning of a double of a splinter bids? Is it different if it is a direct splinter bid by responder (i.e., 1♥ - 4♣) or a splinter raise by opener (i.e., 1♦ - 1♥ - 4♣)?

 

What about later splinters?

 

Thanks.

[Phil]

Hasn't been discussed in awhile.

 

I've always played a splinter double suggests a sac NV, and asks for the a lead of the higher ranking suit (some reverse this - I think there's a reason but I can't remember).

[Mbodell]

Hasn't been discussed in awhile.

 

I've always played a splinter double suggests a sac NV, and asks for the a lead of the higher ranking suit (some reverse this - I think there's a reason but I can't remember).

It is slightly better for double to be the lower ranking suit because you may be able to bid the higher ranking suit yourself to suggest the lead/sac, but the lower ranking suit would take you to a higher level. So 1♠-P-4♦-X showing clubs lets you sometimes bid 4♥ to show hearts.

[Siegmund]

Absent discussion I think it still shows willingness to sacrifice in the splinter suit.

 

With discussion, I play the "shows the lower-ranking non-splinter suit" lead directing method, with a few partners.

 

After the splinter raise by opener, I would be a bit less eager to use the non-splinter lead director, since I now have a 'dummy's first bid suit' available at the end of the auction too.

[Echognome]

The "expert trick double", as I've seen it called, can be tricky. For sake of argument, let's say that the double of a splinter means "lead lower ranked unbid suit". Now the opponents have the auction 1♠ - P - 4♣ (A) - ? So you ask what the alert is and find out it was a Swiss raise (balanced 4-card raise) or a Fit Jump and you do not want to double, lest they decide to rewind it right here. So you pass. Now partner has the UI that you want a diamond lead. Awkward!

[gnasher]

The "expert trick double", as I've seen it called, can be tricky. For sake of argument, let's say that the double of a splinter means "lead lower ranked unbid suit". Now the opponents have the auction 1♠ - P - 4♣ (A) - ? So you ask what the alert is and find out it was a Swiss raise (balanced 4-card raise) or a Fit Jump and you do not want to double, lest they decide to rewind it right here. So you pass. Now partner has the UI that you want a diamond lead. Awkward!

The answer, as always, is to always ask.

[MFA]

Favorable for a save, otherwise a lead director for the suit below.

 

The "expert trick double", as I've seen it called, can be tricky.  For sake of argument, let's say that the double of a splinter means "lead lower ranked unbid suit".  Now the opponents have the auction 1♠ - P - 4♣ (A) - ?  So you ask what the alert is and find out it was a Swiss raise (balanced 4-card raise) or a Fit Jump and you do not want to double, lest they decide to rewind it right here.  So you pass.  Now partner has the UI that you want a diamond lead.  Awkward!

The answer, as always, is to always ask.

We don't need to 'always' ask to nullify this problem. 'Often', or even 'sometimes' is more than enough, since we won't be bidding a lot here anyway.

[aguahombre]

Favorable for a save, otherwise a lead director for the suit below.

 

The "expert trick double", as I've seen it called, can be tricky.  For sake of argument, let's say that the double of a splinter means "lead lower ranked unbid suit".  Now the opponents have the auction 1♠ - P - 4♣ (A) - ?  So you ask what the alert is and find out it was a Swiss raise (balanced 4-card raise) or a Fit Jump and you do not want to double, lest they decide to rewind it right here.  So you pass.  Now partner has the UI that you want a diamond lead.  Awkward!

The answer, as always, is to always ask.

We don't need to 'always' ask to nullify this problem. 'Often', or even 'sometimes' is more than enough, since we won't be bidding a lot here anyway.

I don't understand that. If you sometimes, but not always ask you create a recognizable pattern of behavior (UI).

[MFA]

Favorable for a save, otherwise a lead director for the suit below.

 

The "expert trick double", as I've seen it called, can be tricky.  For sake of argument, let's say that the double of a splinter means "lead lower ranked unbid suit".  Now the opponents have the auction 1♠ - P - 4♣ (A) - ?  So you ask what the alert is and find out it was a Swiss raise (balanced 4-card raise) or a Fit Jump and you do not want to double, lest they decide to rewind it right here.  So you pass.  Now partner has the UI that you want a diamond lead.  Awkward!

The answer, as always, is to always ask.

We don't need to 'always' ask to nullify this problem. 'Often', or even 'sometimes' is more than enough, since we won't be bidding a lot here anyway.

I don't understand that. If you sometimes, but not always ask you create a recognizable pattern of behavior (UI).

I don't think so.

I ask when I need the answer. And I ask sometimes at random, when I don't. Unrelated to my hand. That should be sufficient noise to throw partner off. If it were a situation where I would tend to need the answer quite often, like (1NT)-2♣* I would change questioning strategy, but that's another discussion.

Theoretical, sure it would be ideal to ask always about any bid, but that is not really practical.

[dake50]

Why are we asking "is 4D a splinter?"

Did we not at least look at their CC to have this answer in hand?

Did we not look to see what treatments we are oppocing?

--How did we decide which counter to their 1N is ON: Capp or DONT; penaltyX or T/O?

--Is our counter to Bergen /Drury /1Nforce ON?

 

Then, if CC is not looked at, is not any question UI? Could have the answer by looking, so what is the difference by asking? Unauthorized Information!!?