5-6 Reds

[kriegel]

[hv=pc=n&s=sahkj943dakt862cj&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1d1sdp]133|200[/hv]

 

Matchpoints, standard negative double, 6+ points, 4+ hearts. Your bid?

[mike777]

I'll start with 2s

 

give pard only AQxx in h and we have chances to make somthing.

[Phil]

Nice hand! I'm starting with 3♠ and I'm probably RKCing over 4♥.

[the_clown]

3♠. This 100% agrees ♥ and after the possible 4♠ by overcaller I can RKCB. If I start by 2♠ partner could think that I have a very big hand in the minors when I bid 4N so I dont want to risk a misunderstanding.

[Fluffy]

I would prefer to splinter in clubs, but since it is not possible I will go with 3♠. Oh wait, I had opened 1♥ , nevermind.

[ahydra]

Had to do a double-take on the hand as it looked a bit like the other 1561 in the "which transfer to make" thread. But no, this one is MUCH bigger.

 

The issue with going 4C is that partner is almost certainly going to bid 4H because we have both top diamonds. We're not going to find out anything useful. Hence I think 2S and see what happens.

 

ahydra

[mikeh]

Had to do a double-take on the hand as it looked a bit like the other 1561 in the "which transfer to make" thread. But no, this one is MUCH bigger.

 

The issue with going 4C is that partner is almost certainly going to bid 4H because we have both top diamonds. We're not going to find out anything useful. Hence I think 2S and see what happens.

 

ahydra

The issue with going 4♣ is that it shows a very shapely minor 2-suiter, which isn't what you have. Thinking it is a splinter is allowing what you want it to mean to overcome what bridge logic dictates it must mean.

 

I would start with 2♠ since I don't want to jam my auction via 3♠. Even if 3♠ unambiguously agreed hearts (and does it?), I don't see that we are any further ahead by making that call.....I expect to agree hearts at the 3-level, having already forced to game.

[Statto]

The issue with going 4C is that partner is almost certainly going to bid 4H because we have both top diamonds. We're not going to find out anything useful.

Then we bid 4♠ and we have shown a few useful things.

[Finch]

The issue with going 4♣ is that it shows a very shapely minor 2-suiter, which isn't what you have. Thinking it is a splinter is allowing what you want it to mean to overcome what bridge logic dictates it must mean.

 

I would start with 2♠ since I don't want to jam my auction via 3♠. Even if 3♠ unambiguously agreed hearts (and does it?), I don't see that we are any further ahead by making that call.....I expect to agree hearts at the 3-level, having already forced to game.

 

Really? Usually I am the one in favour of bids being natural, but if you play (as indicated in the OP) that x just promises 4+ hearts, then as far as I am concerned we bid as if partner has responded 1H to 1D in which case 3C is game forcing with the minors and 4C is a splinter.

 

THis isn't the same as, say, 1D 1S x 2S 4C when you need 4C as the minors because 3C is non-forcing.

[rmnka447]

2 ♠ to give partner partner the most room to show what he/she holds.

 

This is a hand where opener needs to captain the auction and ask the questions.

[chasetb]

Frances, I don't know about you but I have the agreement with partner that over interference we don't splinter in suits that haven't been shown. This comes up most often in the example 1♥ - (2♣) , where 4♣ by responder is a splinter and 3♠ / 4♦ are Fit-showing raises. Since a jump to 4♣ is impossible for a FSJ in the given auction, I would take it as a freak with the minors (they are going to bid Spades like crazy).

 

Another reason for not using 4♣ as a splinter is because partner won't appreciate his hand nearly as much. Just cuebid 2♠, and save the room that 3♠ wastes. Besides, I use a treatment that here, 3♠ is a puppet to 3NT to play (thanks to JLall). You could also throw other type GF raises in here as well if you aren't afraid of memory issues.

 

Of course, this is all moot because I will open this hand 1♥. I play 5-card Majors, and KJ9xx is clearly a biddable suit.

[gnasher]

Frances, I don't know about you but I have the agreement with partner that over interference we don't splinter in suits that haven't been shown. This comes up most often in the example 1♥ - (2♣) , where 4♣ by responder is a splinter and 3♠ / 4♦ are Fit-showing raises. Since a jump to 4♣ is impossible for a FSJ in the given auction, I would take it as a freak with the minors (they are going to bid Spades like crazy).

Bridge agreements should be founded on logic, not rules. If our analysis leads to a rule, that's fine, but we shouldn't let dogma overrule logic.

 

In a contested sequence where partner has bid a suit, the opponents have bid a suit, and you have not yet shown any suit, such as 1♥-(2♣) or (1♦)-1♠-(pass), it's useful to be able to show a raise with a strong side-suit, and such hands occur quite frequently. Hence we play fit-jumps in that category of auction.

 

In a sequence where three suits have been bid around the table, such as 1♦-(1♠)-dbl-(pass), a jump in the remaining suit isn't useful as a fit-bid, because such a hand can be shown via a splinter in the enemy suit. Hence we should find some other meaning for 4♣.

 

At this point in the analysis, you seem to be saying "New-suit splinters don't apply in contested auctions, so it can't be one of those". Instead, we should be saying "What's the most useful meaning for 4♣?" I think the answer to that is clearly "A splinter": RHO hasn't raised spades, so it's quite likely that opener is 3451 or 2461.

 

Another reason for not using 4♣ as a splinter is because partner won't appreciate his hand nearly as much.

That might be a reason for not splintering on this hand; it's not a reason for not playing 4♣ as a splinter. If you had Ax KJ9x AK10xxx x and you had a splinter available, why wouldn't you make one?

[han]

Completely agree with Phil's argument for bidding 3S and the English arguments for playing 4C as a splinter.

[Statto]

Of course, this is all moot because I will open this hand 1♥. I play 5-card Majors, and KJ9xx is clearly a biddable suit.

I think it's strong enough to reverse, regardless of how many cards 1♥ promises B-)

[gszes]

This hand has become so good that I am searching for a grand

and starting with 4n. This should eliminate all doubt immediately

about having a heart fit. If p shows me 2 with the Q I am bidding

7h --2 w/o the q and I am settling for 6h If p shows 1 (assuming

I am playing 1430 when hearts are trumps I will bid 5d and be happy

with 6h if p has the Q.

[Fluffy]

This hand has become so good that I am searching for a grand

and starting with 4n. This should eliminate all doubt immediately

about having a heart fit.

I think it undoubtelly denies a heart fit so in a sense you are right :): it clarifies that we don't have it.

On a good day 4NT +1 will be the top for the board

 

 

[han]

In general I agree with you Fluff, but could you give me an example of a hand that bids 4NT without a heart fit? I have to warn you though, I will disagree with your example.

[Fluffy]

In general I agree with you Fluff, but could you give me an example of a hand that bids 4NT without a heart fit? I have to warn you though, I will disagree with your example.

 

I suposed someone would say something like that, the answer I though was: give me an example of a hand that would bid 4NT with heart fit with 2♠ and 3♠ avaible :)

[gwnn]

4NT is any hand with a heart fit and that only wants to know how many keycards partner has (usually long clubs and a heart fit, spades and diamond controlled). I don't know what kind of hand would want to bid a quantitative 4NT. Of course not 18-19 balanced, and then what is left? You can start 2♠ or bid 3NT with some mega club hand without 4 hearts.

[ggwhiz]

2♠ followed by big black will set ♥ as trumps most often unless pard supports ♦ next but keycard on either suit gets me where I want to go.

[Fluffy]

oh and also. I think ♦K is more valuable if partner bids 4NT than ♥K and probably a black ace. So heart blackwood makes no real sense.

[gwnn]

but quantitative makes absolutely no sense.