Splinters and Jacoby 2NT

[Liversidge]

Splinters and Jacoby 2NT seem to me to work as a pair, investigating thin slams where one partner has a void or singleton in a suit in which the other partner has no (wasted) HCPs. Yet Splinters seem (from what I read) to get a lot more mentions. Do partnerships that play Splinters usually play Jacoby 2NT as well?

[ArtK78]

Splinters and Jacoby 2NT seem to me to work as a pair, investigating thin slams where one partner has a void or singleton in a suit in which the other partner has no (wasted) HCPs. Yet Splinters seem (from what I read) to get a lot more mentions. Do partnerships that play Splinters usually play Jacoby 2NT as well?

This topic has been discussed a number of times.

 

The direct answer to your question is yes, partnerships that use Jacoby also use splinters, and vice versa. But the main issue is when do you use one as opposed to the other (assuming that you have an option).

 

The answer depends on whether you want to tell partner what you have and give him captaincy over slam exploration, or whether you want partner to tell you what he has and you take captaincy over slam exploration. The nature of your hand should lead you to make that decision. Typically, the stronger hand should be the captain, as it has fewer questions that need answers.

[helene_t]

Splinters are almost universal but jacoby is not. Many play the 2nt response as invitational or stronger with fit, or as gf balanced without fit. And among those who play it as gf with fit not everyone play jacoby.

[Cyberyeti]

There are many ways to accomplish this, we actually don't play Jacoby or conventional splinters, we use splinters as specifically void showing, with the singletons going thru a "sound raise to 3 or better" 2N to which we respond long suits rather than shortages.

 

Key discussion to have - what is the minimum hand for your partnership to splinter, and is there a maximum ?

[mycroft]

Those that play splinters play some sort of game-forcing major raise (perhaps encompassed in a forcing, limit+ major raise). Not necessarily Jacoby 2NT (Frex, I've played 3♣ as the raise more than once, either straight up or over 1♠ only).

 

Of course, how you play splinters is open to debate as well.

[ArtK78]

The direct answer to your question is yes, partnerships that use Jacoby also use splinters, and vice versa. But the main issue is when do you use one as opposed to the other (assuming that you have an option).

I did not mean to imply that ALL partnerships that use Jacoby also use splinters, and vice versa. I meant to imply that many partnerships that use Jacoby also use splinters, and vice versa. Most partnerships in the Eastern US use both in my experience.

[StevenG]

I believe the poster is in EBUland. Jacoby is hardly played at all in the clubs where I play, although I expect that is not necessarily the case around the country as a whole.

[helene_t]

Here in Yorkshire, the 2NT response to a 1M opening, showing a gf raise, is very popular, and people tend to call it Jacoby although it often isn't because it doesn't ask for a singleton.

[aguahombre]

Splinters turn over the auction to partner, and at the same time, consume his space to maneuver. Because of this, splinters should be very narrow in range and at the minimum of the game-force range.

 

We have an exception, however. With a hand intending to use Exclusion RKC, we can splinter first and Kickback at the 4-level so we don't get in our own way. If our initial intent was to set trump and then Wood, we would set trump the other way ---even if we held a singleton somewhere.

[Vampyr]

I believe the poster is in EBUland. Jacoby is hardly played at all in the clubs where I play, although I expect that is not necessarily the case around the country as a whole.

 

This is true here to some extent too; the 2NT bid is more commonly played as explained above by Helene, and this is a bit more popular than Jacoby.

[fromageGB]

My 2NT does not ask for a singleton either, but I call it Jacoby-style 2NT in conversation to imply a game forcing 4 card support. Of course, when asked after an alert I don't name it, but describe it.

 

I think if you play such a bid, you are likely to play splinters as well, and have agreements as to when one is used rather than the other. Strength is normally the distinction, I think, with 2NT stronger. However, many play splinters without a Jacoby-type 2NT, and I think if you could poll typical club members many more would play splinters than 2NT.

[jeananne25]

Splinters turn over the auction to partner, and at the same time, consume his space to maneuver. Because of this, splinters should be very narrow in range and at the minimum of the game-force range.

 

We have an exception, however. With a hand intending to use Exclusion RKC, we can splinter first and Kickback at the 4-level so we don't get in our own way. If our initial intent was to set trump and then Wood, we would set trump the other way ---even if we held a singleton somewhere.

 

That's how I have played both with Jacoby suggesting a stronger hand and slam interest and the splinter as game force only. Had a problem with partner as he did not play this system. I had a5/5 2,1 hand but, because he splintered, was unable to,show the second 5 cd. Suit which would have led us to 7 rather than 6. Anyone else have this agreement

[Vampyr]

That's how I have played both with Jacoby suggesting a stronger hand and slam interest and the splinter as game force only.

 

Why would you splinter if you weren't hoping to reach a thin slam? Splinters get you to game-level anyway.

[blackshoe]

It is possible, with some artificiality, to show:

 

1. good 9-bad 12 HCP, three card support, and side shortage

2. good 9-bad 12 HCP, four card support, and side shortage

3. good 12-bad 15 HCP, three card support, and side shortage

4. good 12-bad 15 HCP, four card support, and side shortage

5. balanced hands with the above ranges and support.

 

In some cases, you can show whether the shortage is a singleton or a void. IAC, using this system, Jacoby 2NT would be good 15+ HCP and show slam interest. The 2NT bidder might or might not have a side shortage.

 

Note: the above was devised in a 5 card major, 2/1 GF context. Not sure how well it would work in an Acol context.

[Vampyr]

Note: the above was devised in a 5 card major, 2/1 GF context. Not sure how well it would work in an Acol context.

 

My guess is not at all. Don't some of these holdings rely on a forcing 1NT response?

[Trinidad]

Why would you splinter if you weren't hoping to reach a thin slam? Splinters get you to game-level anyway.

But there is a big difference (in bridge terminology) between "slam interest" and "game force only".

 

Usually there are three types of game forces (other than "I want to sign off in game, period."):

• Game force only: Enough for game... but partner may have undisclosed extra values, so "you never know"
  
• Slam interest: About a king better than "Game force only"... it starts a co-operative slam investigation
  
• Slam force: About two kings better than "Game force only"... 12 tricks will be there, unless the opponents can take two first. Forces to slam unless we lack the controls.
  

It is a common agreement to splinter (in response to an opening bid) only with "game force only" hands or with "slam force" hands that can take control of the auction. People who have that agreement, don't splinter with hands with "slam interest". Instead they use Jacoby 2NT if they want to sell the hand as "balanced". Alternatively, they bid a natural suit, emphasizing the suit as a potential source of tricks, and show support on the next round (possibly by splintering).

 

Rik

[blackshoe]

My guess is not at all. Don't some of these holdings rely on a forcing 1NT response?

Yes, now that you mention it.