Supermax

[wank]

Partner has akqjx q axx qxxx so 7s is pretty cold. I think we can all agree 4h was the wrong bid, but I thought the other hand should bid on anyway.

 

Fwiw the players in question are globally known.

[Cyberyeti]

Partner has akqjx q axx qxxx so 7s is pretty cold. I think we can all agree 4h was the wrong bid, but I thought the other hand should bid on anyway.

 

Fwiw the players in question are globally known.

 

I take it they didn't have a 2♠ fit type SJS available, but you're really struggling to find a hand partner would open where the 5 level isn't likely to be at least very playable barring a club ruff, for there to be 3 off the top, partner would need precisely ♥KJ, ♦KQJ, ♣J and decide to open it.

I think either side could bid on.

[42xxbfxx42]

sign off asap ... AK opposite a splinter is a complete waste of values

[msjennifer]

1)5Club. Our splinters guarantee at least a second round control in the unbidden suit.So partner has at least DK and possibly DA.He is worried about my club holdings.

2)With two four card majors ,a small xx in Diamonds,two unguarded suits the hand is unfit to open as 1NT(12/14),at least in my personal opinion and experience.

3)ONLY 14 HCP all in two suits,plus 2four card majors all go against opening it as 15/17 NT.Of course this is my personal opinion and others are free to differ.

[dave_beer]

Partner has akqjx q axx qxxx so 7s is pretty cold. I think we can all agree 4h was the wrong bid, but I thought the other hand should bid on anyway.

In most partnerships I played strong jump shifts.

 

In some of those I used Soloway-style rebids where responder's rebid of a new suit showed support for opener's 1st suit and shortness. In those I would have responded 2♠ and rebid 4♥ over 3♠.

 

In others I didn't jump shift with side shortness but would make a non-jump response followed by a jump rebid in an unbid suit on the 2nd round. I had to play something complicated to describe it if partner rebid a 3rd suit. Using this approach I would have had the same start as the problem but I would have shown real ♣ support.

[Winstonm]

In my not so humble opinion concerning bidding, splinters are valuable as long as the partnership understands the purpose is not to show control of the splintered suit but to show a specific range of cards outside that suit. Why this is important is that it allows partner to re-evaluate his secondary cards in the knowledge that there are working cards opposite. Some random hand like AQxxx, xxx, Kx, QJ9 isn't very slammish but if partner splinters in hearts after we open 1S what we should know is that all our cards have supporting cards opposite and slam may well be in the picture.

 

Of course, this means refraining from splintering when two suits are open - I argue that KJxx, x, xxx, AKQxx should not splinter but instead bid either 2 or 3C, depending on system.

 

Using splinters as an exclusion bid that expressly emphasizes cards outside the splintered suit may reduce the frequency but compensates by being a more meaningful expression.

 

With that understanding - I sign off in 4.

[SteveMoe]

4♠

[Zelandakh]

My vote is for D as this looks like a clear upgrade to me. Having taken over from the wine waiter I would definitely want to make a move over 4♥. The obvious try is 5♣ but I would like to know first if I have an agreement with partner about 5♠. It seems to me that this ought to refer to trump quality here, in which case that is probably a better call all things considered.

[mr1303]

When I play, if I discount KQJ in the splinter suit and I would still have my bids, I can co-operate. 4NT is quite inappropriate with my hand so I cue-bid 5C, and await developments.

 

If partner bids 5D, do I bid 5H or 5S... tough one. Probably 5H to show 1st round control, but partner is in control. I do not go past 5S.