Jumping into the 4th suit

[zenbiddist]

1♦ / 1♥ /

1♠ / ?

 

3♣ is...? (We weren't playing XYZ)

3♣ should be?

 

Thanks

[Vampyr]

Looks like a splinter with no discussion.

 

As to what it should be, I don't know. There are probably better uses than splinter.

[nige1]

Pard: You:

1D 1H

1S ?

3C is...? (We weren't playing XYZ)

3C should be?

Agree with Vampyr that 3♣ should be a splinter.

1♣ - 1♦ -;

1♥ - 2♠

Some partnerships define 2♠ in the above sequence as natural but I think it should be a splinter, too.

[Mbodell]

Invitational with long ♣ + the ♥ you've shown. Would 2♣ have been artificial and game forcing (FSF)?

[Vampyr]

Agree with Vampyr that 3♣ should be a splinter.

 

I didn't say it should be!

 

This:

Invitational with long ♣ + the ♥ you've shown. Would 2♣ have been artificial and game forcing (FSF)?

 

for example, might be better on a frequency basis.

[Phil]

Its either invitational or a weak hand with a lot of clubs. Best to discuss.

[benlessard]

In standard im pretty sure its natural invitationnal.

 

If 3D/3H/3S are all inv I dont see why 3C would be different.

 

 

However after 1D-1H-1NT imo 3C is to play while 2C followed by 3C is GF. I think if you have 6C inv you have to settle for 2NT.

 

In french expert standard 2NT is a relay to 3C and its a part of Roudi or Xyz. 2C nmf doesnt promise a 5M.

[paulg]

It's not standard but I play that a jump in the fourth suit shows a 4-card raise of opener's second suit with a splinter in opener's first suit.

[gnasher]

I expect the standard meaning varies by location. Like two other posters from the UK, I'd assume a splinter without discussion.

I think the best meaning is natural and game-forcing. That makes FSF auctions better, because a sequence like

1♦-1♥

1♠-2♣

2♦-3♣

can just be a further request for information.

[mcphee]

We prefer the jump shows 5-5+ GF and have discovered it works well.

[Vampyr]

I expect the standard meaning varies by location. Like two other posters from the UK, I'd assume a splinter without discussion.

I think the best meaning is natural and game-forcing. That makes FSF auctions better, because a sequence like

1♦-1♥

1♠-2♣

2♦-3♣

can just be a further request for information.

 

Would you use the same approach whatever the 4th suit was (assuming 1/1 and no reverse)?

[gnasher]

Would you use the same approach whatever the 4th suit was (assuming 1/1 and no reverse)?

 

Yes. In fact, I'd use the same approach even if there were a 2/1, a reverse, or both.

[zenbiddist]

Invitational with long ♣ + the ♥ you've shown. Would 2♣ have been artificial and game forcing (FSF)?

 

2♣ would have been 4th suit GFing.

 

Thanks everyone, the variance of opinion is telling enough that it was too risky as an undiscussed bid!

[BudH]

If 2C is artificial GF, then 3C is 5-5 invitational.

If 2C is one round artificial force, then 3C is 5-5 game force.

[Siegmund]

Playing a majors-first style, this jump (and 1m-1M-1NT-3om) tends to be 6 of the minor and only 4 of the major. If I had 5-5 I would have FSFed/NMFed to look for the 5-3 fit.

And in my preferred style, all of these jumps are GF and all the invitations go through FSF/NMF - but I realize most of the 2/1 world does it the other way round.

 

Absent discussion I would play a random pickup partner for a strong 5-5, but I wouldn't expect a good random partner to spring it on me.

[PhantomSac]

I would guess 5-5 inv, but natural weak (4-6) and 5-5 strong are also both popular so I would never bid this undiscussed.

 

Never would have thought splinter, you brits are weirdos :P

[broze]

I would guess 5-5 inv, but natural weak (4-6) and 5-5 strong are also both popular so I would never bid this undiscussed.

 

Never would have thought splinter, you brits are weirdos :P

 

Ha! Don't lump us all together! I also would never have thought splinter and play 5-5 inv in all my partnerships where I have discussed it.