your bid

[dboxley]

[hv=pc=n&s=skj932haj2dt3cak7&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1sp4hp]133|200[/hv]

MPs both vul

4H is splinter

[gszeszycki]

5c

 

while I am unsure how much power your partner promised for the splinter bid,

my hand is hardly a disappointment. Thus I begin with a cue bidding sequence

let P know my hand might be slam worthy. Another advantage of the cue bid is

that it lets P know I am not strong enough to take control of the bidding

at this point (for who knows what reason).

[MrAce]

U need to either give up on RKCB or controls.

 

If pd has something like AQxx x QJxx QJxx then RKCB will cause problems

 

If pd has something like Qxxx x KQJx QJxx control cue may cause problems.

 

In the first hand u ask key cards and end up in slam but u may get away with it if they dont lead ♦. If u chose control cues u will stop at 5 since u told them what to lead..

 

If u start with 5♣(obviously u are telling everyone that u are lack of ♦ control or u have a void somewhere so u didnt start 4NT) in second hand pd will bid 5♦ and u will bid 5♥. Why do we bid 5♥ ? Why we keep on cueing after we showed learnt controls in all 3 suits ? Because opener has either trump issues or keycard issues. He can not have AKxxx ♠ for his 5♥ bid, he also can not have 4 keycards or he wld bid the slam.

 

When i need to sacrifice from RKCB or control cues i usually give up on controls. But this particular hand it seems starting with 5♣ will work fine with a regular partner. Some partner that i don't have agreements, i would definetely start 4 NT.

 

In a match that u need a big score, u may start with 5♦ cue and go for the throat :D

[mike777]

4s no problem yet

[the hog]

4S also.

[dake50]

As I play spl (using max space), 4+controls with Axxx/Kxxx (Qxxx support allowed only if void)

I just key for 6S/7S.

[Yogeshdg]

4s

[kenrexford]

As I play spl (using max space), 4+controls with Axxx/Kxxx (Qxxx support allowed only if void)

I just key for 6S/7S.

 

Ah! Someone who discusses splinters intelligently!

 

I agree with this completely. A one-under splinter leaves no room for LTTC. Therefore, purity is required to allow partner to bid intelligently. The "proof" for this is in the problem here. If RKCB solves no problems and if the cue alternative solves no problems, then the definition for 4♥ is too wide. Tighten the definition, and use 2/1 (or an alternative) for other hands.

[mtvesuvius]

Yeah, we all know you'd bid 2♣, Ken... Even if we gave you:

 

AKQJx

x

QJxx

xxx

 

:)

 

Anyway I'd bid 4N. I agree that the one-under splinter should be better than most, and if we get to a slam off two cashers in diamonds, they haven't led them yet.

[Finch]

If u start with 5♣(obviously u are telling everyone that u are lack of ♦ control or u have a void somewhere so u didnt start 4NT) in second hand pd will bid 5♦ and u will bid 5♥. Why do we bid 5♥ ? Why we keep on cueing after we showed learnt controls in all 3 suits ? Because opener has either trump issues or keycard issues.

 

This statement is typical of players who never consult their partner.

When partner splinters, even if you have discussed the range with them in advance and have a clear agreement as to the exact range, partner can still have a maximum, a minimum, or something in between.

As opener, I may have a hand that is prepared to drive to slam with the correct number of keycards opposite, in which case I can use RKCB.

I might have a hand that is missing a control in one suit, but has enough to bid a slam, in which case I can choose to start a cue-bidding auction and bid slam if partner shows a control.

 

However, there's a third possibility: I might have a hand that may or may not be making slam, but I don't know which... I am interested in whether partner has a good hand for their splinter, or is minimum. One way to find out is to make a slam _try_ - this is a call you don't seem to realise exists. If we bid, say, ...5C - 5D - 5H then as opener I've told partner that we don't have 2 top cashers but I'm not certain whether there is enough for slam. This doesn't show necessarily "trump issues" or "keycard issues", it says I am uncertain whether to bid a slam or not.

 

Take this hand as an example. Suppose you've agreed that the 4H splinter shows 11-15 HCP, exactly a singleton heart, no strong suit outside spades. Partner might have:

 

AQxx

x

AKxx

Qxxx

 

That's a maximum and you are making a grand.

 

Or he might have

 

A10xx

Q

AJx

Jxxxx

 

well, that might not be quite in range, but it's certainly a minimum and ideally you want to stop out of 6.

 

Both of these hands have 2 aces and have all the suits controlled. On the first, if you start a cue-bidding auction, responder will bid 6D over 5H because he's huge. On the second responder will sign off.

[MrAce]

This statement is typical of players who never consult their partner.

 

If you read it more carefully, you could see that your accusation is not fair.

 

I could also "reinvite" if i wanted to. But then i would bid 5♠ after 5♦ instead of 5♥ ;) I specifically mentioned that if one of the partners still not taking action but showing the unnecesarry control, i suggested this means trump weakness or ....etc etc. :) Otherwise i could pass the ball back to pd with 5♠...Whether my logic is right or wrong, not consulting pd was not what i did. I just asked him something else than u did in your examples. You asked him "range" i asked him "how about our trumps ? "

 

Anyway, i am not a 5 level "reinvite" believer. Are we at 5 level and still inviting each other ? I admit there are cases it may really work, however there are much more important things i give priority rather than pd's range at 5 level. :)

[rhm]

4s no problem yet

 

I would rather bid 6♠ than 4♠

 

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

U need to either give up on RKCB or controls.

 

If pd has something like Qxxx x KQJx QJxx control cue may cause problems.

 

 

You seem to have a problem understanding what a splinter looks like.

I would invite game with this nonsense.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[OleBerg]

U need to either give up on RKCB or controls.

 

Usual highjacking:

 

A modified version of culbertsons ace-checking-mechanism solves this.

 

Here 4NT is like a cuebid, except that it shows 3 aces and says nothing about controls.

Partner will now know that an ace, but only one, is required for cuebidding.

A direct cuebid would show excactly two aces, thus partner would require two aces to make a cuebid.

 

My own official add-on is, that 5♠ would show 4 aces, but still only invite partner to bid slam. In other sequences 5♠ has another meaning; like 1♠-4♣, 4♥ - 5♠. Here it shows only one ace (two is required for a 5-level cue), but otherwise an absolute maximum. Thus opener would not always be forced to pass 4♠ on a dubious hand with 3 aces.

 

Pro's: So you can both check aces and controls. And in sequences where all controls are shown below 5 of the agreed suit, a chance to reinvite is given; 1♠ - 4♥, 5♣ - 5♦, 5♠ = I'd rather bid slam than not, but you can have a say too. (Yes, I know 5♥ could have that meaning too, but in non-splinter-sequences that is not an option.)

 

Con's: You need a lot more agreements, and accidents are bound to happen in the implementation-period.

 

General: This method shines the most in competitive sequences, and in systems where you volontarily use up a lot of space on not-so-well-defined bids.

 

 

 

Some say that playing this in the "denial-cuebid" way is even better. So after 1♠-4♥;

 

4NT: Denies three aces.

5♣: Shows three aces and denies club-control.

5♦: Shows three aces and club control, denies diamond-control.

5♥: Shows three aces and club and diamond control, but denies heart control.

 

The same principles apply for the next bid; not going back to thrumphs shows control in the suits partner has denied control in, but denies it in the suit bid. I have never experimented with this, but at a glance it seems like you are insured to always be able to check controls surely, but you lose the occasional re-invite option. Also, it seems like you'd need even more agreements.

[Fluffy]

I'd bid 5♣, that way we will be able to show ♥A and partner might evaluate his void as no extras

[MrAce]

You seem to have a problem understanding what a splinter looks like.

I would invite game with this nonsense.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

And you probably would pass with those vs an invitation (i know u wouldnt probably bother to open them and pass it out in peace but :D )

 

AKxxx Qxx xx Kxx

 

KJxxx xxx xx AKx

 

AJTxx Kxx xx Kxx

 

I gave u 3 examples, with hands that will pass an invitation, and to be fair i used wasted ♥ honors in 2 of 3. First 2 are cold , 3rd is looking at a finesse.

 

Now; since i also believe u are having problems with understanding what a splinter is, no need for a cat fight, here is the definition of splinter, and i am NOT the one who made this definition.

 

Responder's Splinter Bid : 11-14 hcp, stiff or void in the splinter suit, 4 card trump support, at least Qxxx strength in unbid suit(s). Singleton A is not a prefered hand for splinter bid. (Some other sources also not prefer a void)

 

But if you still dont like Qxxx x KQJx QJxx make the ♠ suit Axxx, still the problem i mentioned exists, if u get in control cue with standart methods u may end up in slam with an A and trump Q missing.

 

@Oleberg: I heard that treatment you wrote b4, but didnt have the chance to look at it tbh. But the way u wrote it, i am very much convinced that it is better than both std blind 4NT or std control cue toys. Thank you.

[whereagles]

By FTL lore we have short suit total of 3 and a likely 25+ working points. That means SLAM ZONE!

 

4NT.