What is 3 Spades?

[dickiegera]

[hv=d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1h1s3s]133|100|What is 3 Spades?[/hv]

[silvr bull]

My partnership agreement is that a jump que below 3NT asks partner to bid 3NT with a stopper in their suit. I might have xx xx Kx AKQJxxx, or a variation around that theme.

[broze]

For us it is a transfer to 3NT. (Yes, I expect "standard" would be to play it as a splinter)

[kenberg]

1♥-Pass-3♠ is a splinter and, as far as I know, 1♥-(1♠)-3♠ is still a splinter. No doubt there could be other useful meanings, but the splinter usage seems normal enough.

[helene_t]

I think most play it as a splinter

[MrAce]

Splinter.

[Trinidad]

Another vote for splinter

 

Rik

[hrothgar]

Splinter

[gszes]

Playing 2/1 (sans neg free bids) with a hand similar to

xx xx AKQJxx Axx I can start with 2d there is no need for

me to waste so much bidding space merely to ask for a stop

in the opps suit for 3n since we still have lots of room

to investigate.

 

splinter seems like the correct interpretation.

[MrAce]

My partnership agreement is that a jump que below 3NT asks partner to bid 3NT with a stopper in their suit. I might have xx xx Kx AKQJxxx, or a variation around that theme.

 

Interesting. This method seems to have a bad and good feature.

 

Bad- You probably will end up in wrong contracts when pd bids 3 NT.

 

Good- It will probably never come.

[the hog]

Interesting. This method seems to have a bad and good feature.

 

Bad- You probably will end up in wrong contracts when pd bids 3 NT.

 

Good- It will probably never come.

 

rofl. This is the post of the month. What's more, I agree with you for a change.

[silvr bull]

Interesting. This method seems to have a bad and good feature.

 

Bad- You probably will end up in wrong contracts when pd bids 3 NT.

 

Good- It will probably never come.

That's pretty funny. :) Our jump que treatment does not come up often, but it is very useful when it does appear. We haven't got to the wrong spot with it yet, though we find too many other ways to do that on many other deals. :rolleyes: You will not get an argument from me if you say that other treatments for the jump que are more efficient or frequent, but this method has the advantage of KISS for us where any jump que below 3NT asks for a stop. With my example hand, I would bid 3♠ after RHO opened 1♠. As I get older, simple and consistent KISS rules are increasingly valuable to me.

 

So, how would you handle my example hand above? After partner opens 1♥ and RHO overcalls 1♠, your objective is to tell partner that you have a solid 6 or 7 card suit that needs only a stopper to have a good play for 3NT. And you need to do that before your LHO raises to 3♠, then P P back to you. If partner has the right stuff for a slam, he will know how to bid something more constructive than 3NT after my descriptive jump que, but if he has a minimum opener with a ♠ stop, how else will you convince him to bid 3NT after your LHO bids 3♠?

[kenberg]

KISS? If you are going with KISS, using 3♠ to show a stiff spade, heart support and gf values seems pretty KISSy to me.

[neilkaz]

Splinter for me and I've played it both ways and clearly prefer splinter noting that there's often a chance to sort out stoppers later if your looking for 3NT with a good minor or perhaps after you bid your minor, opener can bid NT anyhow.

[razorsharp]

AHA - just ask that to Grue, Woolsey, et alii - 3S is a relay to 3NT, (defaut) showing a typical balanced opener with ONE spade stopper! (i.e. Axx,Qx,KQxx,Kxxx) that may gain a positional advantage from opener declaring 3NT - like holding SQxx, even maybe Jx!

 

razorsharp

[steve2005]

Playing 2/1 (sans neg free bids) with a hand similar to

xx xx AKQJxx Axx I can start with 2d there is no need for

me to waste so much bidding space merely to ask for a stop

in the opps suit for 3n since we still have lots of room

to investigate.

 

splinter seems like the correct interpretation.

 

Agree, even with other hands if you have enough to play in 3N opposite a mere stopper you will have enough to make a forcing bid and then cuebid 3♠ if still want to

[wank]

you're missing the point. it's not to ask for a spade stop. it shows a spade stop, but a potentially anti-positional holding, such that you want partner to play it to protect whatever modest holding he has. think something like aqx. if you have aqx it's very unlikely partner will bid no trumps unless you force him to, but if partner has something like 10xx or jx it's better from his hand.

[steve2005]

you're missing the point. it's not to ask for a spade stop. it shows a spade stop, but a potentially anti-positional holding, such that you want partner to play it to protect whatever modest holding he has. think something like aqx. if you have aqx it's very unlikely partner will bid no trumps unless you force him to, but if partner has something like 10xx or jx it's better from his hand.

 

that's the old east coast/west coast thing two different meanings for same bid lol

[monikrazy]

I use it as a western cue bid., asking opener to bid 3NT with a stopper in enemy suit.

 

Yes, it uses more bidding space than some other auctions available. But that's normally a good thing when it makes it harder for opponents to discern the best way to defeat 3N.

[Phil]

Definitely prefer this as a transfer to 3N but that might not be I/A stuff except for JillyBean :P

[kenberg]

Definitely prefer this as a transfer to 3N but that might not be I/A stuff except for JillyBean :P

 

This attitude surfaces from time to time. mikeh on a different thread took someone to task for posting something on I/A that he thought would be beyond us. At the risk of appearing over-sensitive, I wish to respond.

 

"Not expert" does not equate to "stupid". I am sure that I can follow an explanation of how to use 3♠ as a transfer. I might decide to use it, I might decide not to, but I am positive I could follow the explanation. For me, the main limitation is that I do not have a regular partnership that is committed to extensive partnership agreements. This can be an issue at any level, including expert and even world class. For example: 1♥-(2♠)-4♣. Without the interference this is a splinter for virtually all Advanced players and almost all Intermediates (I play with quite a few Intermediates, trust me on this). With the interference? I think even expert opinion varies. Or maybe not. But I would be less certain how a partner intended it. I generally like to arrange agreements so that we can cover a lot of cases w/o a lot of discussion. For example, in an uncontested auction, I like all second round jumps to the three level by responder to be invitational, at least as the default. A list of exceptions is possible. So, w/o further discussion, 1♣-1♠-1NT=3♥ is invitational, the forcing hand goes through 2♦ before the 3♥ bid. I have no idea if this is best, but it falls into the scheme of second round jumps by responder being invitational so it does not require a separate discussion. Back to the OP. I would play, undiscussed, that 3♠ is a splinter. It's a splinter w/o the interference and. w/o disucssion, it's a splinter with the interference. This is not because I am Advanced rather than Expert, it is because with my limited commitment to the game I go with simplicity.

 

But if someone writes an argument about the merits of using 3♠ as a transfer to NT and it seems right, I do have partners who might well be willing to play that way. I really don't see that it matters whether they are Advanced or Expert.

[Phil]

Hi Ken-

 

Think of MikeH as a concerned parent and an inverted 2♣ rebid as donuts. It's fun to learn (eat) this convention (food) but the long term effects are mostly negative.

 

I'm sure there are a lot of really neat methods that don't find their way into the I/A arena. However, this forum seems to be focused on player development and too many newer players concentrate way too much on gizmos and gadgets long before mastering the basics.

 

It's a perfectly appropriate 'attitude' for a player like MikeH to help police content in these areas. This isn't about treating players 'stupidly', it's about helping to reverse a trend of bridge teachers making a living by teaching a lot of nonsense before someone is ready for it.

[kenberg]

I mostly take comments with that view, or, as I like to think of it, I shouldn't take offense when no offense was intended. There have been a series of events lately that individually I shrug off but collectively started to agitate me. Anyway, enough with that and so movin' on:

 

It would seem to me that after an auction begins 1♥-(1♠) there is a significant possibility that opener's side might have to decide what to do after the opponent's, sooner or later, bid 4♠. With that in mind it appears that 3♠ as a splinter might be even more useful here than it would be in a non-competitive auction. At least there must be a trade-off, no?

 

The OP asked for the meaning of 3♠, I fully expect he is aware of the splinter meaning w/o the interference so I take the question to be either "What do you think is best?" or else "What would you expect if this is undiscussed?". I really think the answer to the second is that it's a splinter. This might depend on level but I am not so sure. Imagine you are called in at the last moment to replace someone in a high level game. Maybe you replace Jeff Meckstroth and while both you and Rodwell can play a big club, it takes considerable discussion (unless you know their system or he knows yours) to avoid disaster so you decide to play 2/1 and hope for the best. This auction comes up. You would know how Rodwell intends it? You are sure?

 

As to which is best, I have an open mind (so I claim) but splinter sounds good to me.

 

I like your donut analogy.