Correct bid or not?

[dickiegera]

[hv=pc=n&s=sk987h3dk5cakt642&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1sp]133|200[/hv]

 

 

Is my bid 4♥ splinter or is there a better bid?

 

Iam assuming that 3♥ would be a pre-empt in ♥ Correct?

[jillybean]

Do you play Jacoby 2nt?

[mikeh]

I think that the expert community would be close to unanimous in saying that this hand is far too strong for a splinter

 

I’d go further and say that it is extremely useful to show your clubs first

 

 

Some players might use jacoby but I think that using jacoby, even with a good set of methods (in other words, not J2N as it is usually taught) is a poor choice

 

 

Bid 2C. What happens next is dependent on partner’s rebid but I’m supporting spades next time. Exactly how depends on what partner bids

 

 

As for what 3H means, there’s no clear standard

 

Common treatments include mini-splinter....4 spades, shirt hearts and around 9 hcp... and a weak jumpshift ....and natural, invitational with 6+ hearts

 

 

My own preference is to use 3H over 1S (and 3S over 1H) as an unspecified splinter. Opener only asks if he would be interested in slam if we had the ‘right’ splinter. This way the opps don’t get the information leakage afforded by telling them where our shortness is, unless opener asks

 

In another partnership, we use 3H as a 4 card limit raise, using 3D as an invitational bid in hearts

 

Iow, the meaning of 3H is subject to agreement

[Winstonm]

[hv=pc=n&s=sk987h3dk5cakt642&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1sp]133|200[/hv]

 

 

Is my bid 4♥ splinter or is there a better bid?

 

Iam assuming that 3♥ would be a pre-empt in ♥ Correct?

 

I think you will get divergent answers about the first question. There are those who would splinter with that hand, i.e., bid 4H. There is a second group of players - me included - that is more inclined to bid our suits, i.e., a source of tricks, before showing the spade support.

 

Each side has plusses and minuses. Pick your own poison.

 

The second question again is up to choice. Some play this as invitational with 6+ hearts. Some play it as a fit jump with a heart suit. Some play it as a mini-splinter. Some play it as a strong jump shift. Very few play it as a pre-empt.

[LBengtsson]

I find Jacoby 2NT and splinters are overused when there is another sensible bid available: 2♣. why waste bidding space with 2/1 :) its a good suit, the bidding is already forcing to game, and usually, but not every time, the 2/1 responder is in charge. if partner has 3 card ♣ support with Qxx even Jxx you might wish to be in a ♣ slam as opposed to a ♠ slam to protect the ♦Kx on the opening lead. the chances of reaching a ♣ slam are gone if you splinter or bid 2NT here.

[jillybean]

I find Jacoby 2NT and splinters are overused when there is another sensible bid available: 2♣. why waste bidding space with 2/1 :) its a good suit, the bidding is already forcing to game, and usually, but not every time, the 2/1 responder is in charge. if partner has 3 card ♣ support with Qxx even Jxx you might wish to be in a ♣ slam as opposed to a ♠ slam to protect the ♦Kx on the opening lead. the chances of reaching a ♣ slam are gone if you splinter or bid 2NT here.

I missed 2/1 in the title. Yes, I would start with 2♣

[mw64ahw]

A modified Jacoby 2NT for me followed by the slam investigation. I reserve the 2/1 for when there is no immediate fit.

[Cyberyeti]

We would bid 3♣ (GF fit) with this, but many 5M systems use that for something else.

[Douglas43]

Looks like a 2♣ when not playing 2/1. It would be my first choice (I normally play Acol with Jacoby, splinters and strong jump shifts. Second choice 3♣ followed by 4♠.

[johnu]

Looks like a 2♣ when not playing 2/1.

 

Also looks like 2♣ when you are playing 2/1.

 

Most players I have played against limit these splinters to hands with around limit raise strength. This hand is so strong you've got to think about overriding partner if they signoff in 4♠.

 

Also, making a 2/1 2♣ bid doesn't mean you can't still make a splinter.

 

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1sp2cp2sp4h]133|100[/hv]

 

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1sp2cp2np4h]133|100[/hv]

[pescetom]

Looks like a 2♣ when not playing 2/1. It would be my first choice (I normally play Acol with Jacoby, splinters and strong jump shifts. Second choice 3♣ followed by 4♠.

Looks to me like a 2♣ when playing 2/1, assuming your shoe laces are not tied by Jacoby 2NT.

Agree with mikeh that it is too strong to splinter and 2♣ is the obvious bid that fully exploits space with this promising hand.

[jillybean]

Looks like a 2♣ when not playing 2/1. It would be my first choice (I normally play Acol with Jacoby, splinters and strong jump shifts. Second choice 3♣ followed by 4♠.

If you are not playing 2/1, what do you do after 1♠ 2♣ 2♠?

[smerriman]

If you are not playing 2/1, what do you do after 1♠ 2♣ 2♠?

Now seems a more appropriate time for a 4♥ splinter.

[Douglas43]

Now seems a more appropriate time for a 4♥ splinter.

 

Thanks smerriman, that would have been my choice of continuation too.

 

It is very close to a strong jump shift to 3♣, that would have been my choice if K♦ had been A♦, but I suppose that's not an option in 2/1?

[mw64ahw]

Thanks smerriman, that would have been my choice of continuation too.

 

It is very close to a strong jump shift to 3♣, that would have been my choice if K♦ had been A♦, but I suppose that's not an option in 2/1?

What does the splinter gain rather than first setting trumps with 3♠ and then using serious/frivolous3NT or cue-bidding to establish controls in all suits?

 

South's hand remains distributionally strong and I would take the slower route to establish a viable slam.

 

Additionally why go the 2♣ route when Jacoby 2NT (assuming you use it) is more descriptive if played in the stricter modified form. You establish the trump suit at a lower level which gives even further room for the slam investigation.

[Douglas43]

What does the splinter gain rather than first setting trumps with 3♠ and then using serious/frivolous3NT or cue-bidding to establish controls in all suits?

 

South's hand remains distributionally strong and I would take the slower route to establish a viable slam.

 

Additionally why go the 2♣ route when Jacoby 2NT (assuming you use it) is more descriptive if played in the stricter modified form. You establish the trump suit at a lower level which gives even further room for the slam investigation.

 

Hi MW this was a sub-thread about how bidding might proceed when not playing 2/1 forcing to game (so 3♠ now is not viable as it would not be forcing).

[mw64ahw]

Sorry missed that

[Stephen Tu]

What does the splinter gain rather than first setting trumps with 3♠ and then using serious/frivolous3NT or cue-bidding to establish controls in all suits?

 

South's hand remains distributionally strong and I would take the slower route to establish a viable slam.

 

Additionally why go the 2♣ route when Jacoby 2NT (assuming you use it) is more descriptive if played in the stricter modified form. You establish the trump suit at a lower level which gives even further room for the slam investigation.

Jacoby 2nt is not very descriptive (other than 4+ support GF, usu balanced). Rather, it's interrogative. You use it when you want to ask opener what he has, rather than describe what you have. Most people don't have a way to show the club suit after Jacoby 2nt. So partner won't get as excited about holding Qx/Qxx than if you showed real clubs, since your cue bid in clubs could be based on just Axx or Kxxx. A lot don't have a way to definitively show shortness by responder after J2nt either.

 

The advantage of showing the splinter, *after* showing the club suit, is that partner can evaluate their heart holding better. They'll know that KQx is bad, but xxx / Axx is good. If you just 2/1 then raise spades, if partner cues 4H, in today's world where mixed 1st/2nd round cues are more popular, you don't know if partner is cue bidding a K or an Ace, and even if it's the ace, whether they have lower honors in the suit that would be more useful elsewhere, like say the Qd rather than the QH to help you not be off two diamonds off the top when the ace is offside.