1H:3S what does partner show? (2/1)

[jillybean]

[hv=pc=n&s=s92hkqt84dk64caj7&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1hp3sp]133|200[/hv]

 

2/1

 

What are your agreements here?

[Stephen Tu]

Default meaning without discussion is a splinter raise with shortage in spades specifically.

 

Advanced meaning only with agreement can be part of a tiered splinter system, where 3S shows all splinters of one type (3nt ask for clarification), where 3nt takes the place of a direct spade splinter. The multiplexed splinters are either weaker than the direct splinters, or show singleton rather than void or the other way around.

 

Other meanings are possible with agreement of course, but are exceedingly rare compared to being part of some splinter type scheme.

[Winstonm]

[hv=pc=n&s=s92hkqt84dk64caj7&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1hp3sp]133|200[/hv]

 

2/1

 

What are your agreements here?

 

As Bob and I grew older and played less and less, the idea of memorability became more important. Therefore, what we did was try to streamline our bidding so that certain treatments were always the same, such as unnecessary* jumps. Those were always splinter. That does not mean this is ideal or that splinters are ideal. It was just our way of trying to avoid disaster.

 

*unnecessary meant above any bid already defined, such as 1H-2S was defined so splinter was 1H-3S. But the key word was always.

[Douglas43]

Can't speak for 2/1 but it's a splinter in Acol.

[mycroft]

Agreements with my current regular partner:

• 1♠ - 4+, 6+
  
• 2♠ - Fit jump, INV values, likely 5♠-4♥
  
• 3♠ - (meta-agreement) if next lower bid in that suit is forcing, then this is a splinter
  
• 4♠ - to play. (other meta-agreement - if not otherwise defined, game bids are to play.) Clearly with this call, if you think 4♠ is the place to play opposite my 1=5=4=3 11-count, my 3=5=1=4 20 count should look for (grand) slam

 

Playing with "2/1" partner, it's a splinter (because 4♠ can't be). However I know of at least two people for whom 2♠ is preemptive, and 3 is even more preemptive. Not my style :-)

[Gilithin]

1. A normal splinter in ♠ (assumed meaning without discussion).

2. A normal splinter in any suit (usually in combination with Swiss).

3. A normal singleton splinter in any suit (played in combination with void splinters).

4. A normal void splinter in any suit (played in combination with singleton splinters).

5. An extra-strength splinter in any suit (played in combination with 3NT as a normal ♠ splinter).

6. A normal game forcing fit jump (less popular than splinters but some players prefer them).

7. Natural and preemptive (uncommon these days but might be seen as default agreement by some older partners).

8. There are several other forms of Swiss that use 3♠ for various types of game forcing ♥ raise.

[LBengtsson]

the word missing from splinter is 'SPECIFIC'. to waste so much bidding space by 'splinter-ing' you should have a very specific range and type of hand with preferable a stiff ♠.

 

1. does 3♠ here show a stiff ♠ or a void? (I do not like splinters with voids but some players do).

2. does it show 4 or 5 card ♥ support?

3. does it show a specific honour card point range?

4. does it show a specific total points range?

 

it is obvious that on some hands not all the criteria above can be met, but if partnerships take in mind that they need to satisfy 3 out of the 4 above according to their agreements then that will be more specific than using a splinter bid whenever they have trump support and a stiff in any suit.

[mw64ahw]

Standard for me is a splinter raise with ♠ shortage.

However, I use it as a slam try in ♥ with ♠ control (may or may not be a splinter)

[DavidKok]

Everybody else has already mentioned the arguments for this being a splinter, and I agree it should be a relatively sharply defined hand (barring conventional treatment). For me it shows 9-12(13) HCP with at least 4 hearts and 0 or 1 spades, and if 1 typically not an A/K/Q. If on the lower end of this range the hand has other compensating features ('Partner I had a good 10 count'), but that is actually due to a quirk of the system (we can also opt for 2NT with these hands, so we split them by playing strength). Stronger hands start with 2♣, weaker hands have no business forcing to the 4-level.

 

I should mention that a better treatment is to play these splinters as 2-way - either the limited case above, or a let's say 18+ splinter that wants to force to the 5-level regardless. Though in 2/1 there's a good case for just starting with 2♣ on those hands anyway.

 

The question is what opener should do next. I think this hand does not have the values to try for slam opposite a limited splinter (if I imagine a perfect minimum I'm thinking of something like ♠-, ♥Axxxx, ♦AJxxx, ♣xxx and I still need to play the diamonds for no losers on a club lead). Time to bail, 4♥.

[Gilithin]

I should mention that a better treatment is to play these splinters as 2-way - either the limited case above, or a let's say 18+ splinter that wants to force to the 5-level regardless.

This is just a standard splinter. When posters refer to a splinter being tightly defined, they are specifically talking about the lower range. It is implied that there are also hands that can bid on over 4 of opener's major. This is also why extra-strength splinters are often described as "in-between", because they cover the range between the top of the lower range standard splinter and the bottom of the high range, typically around 16-19TP.

[jillybean]

Thanks. I've yet to see a compelling reason why I should use up all this bidding room to describe a hand that can be bid with a 2/1 or Jacoby 2nt raise.

[Stephen Tu]

Thanks. I've yet to see a compelling reason why I should use up all this bidding room to describe a hand that can be bid with a 2/1 or Jacoby 2nt raise.

 

Because this is the best way to *describe* your hand to partner when you have something resembling the prototypical splinter hand. When you have a shortness and a minimum range GF, the idea is that you want to give your side a chance to reach low HCP slams where there is minimal wastage in partner's hand opposite. You ideally want partner to have xxx/xxxx or maybe Axx in the splinter suit. Your partner can't tell that these are good holdings, or that KQx is a bad one, if you don't show him that you have a splinter! If you J2nt, you find out if *partner* has a splinter, but in standard schemes you can't show partner *your* splinter. If you 2/1, on many continuations you won't be able show your splinter, and you are overstating the quality of your 2/1 suit sometimes (2/1 then splinter should show much better side suit than direct splinter implies).

 

If it goes 1h-2c-?-3h-?, maybe it goes 3s frivolous, 3nt spade cue your singleton, but how is partner supposed to know that SKQx is bad and Sxxx is good if the spade cue could be either ace or K or shortness? Or if partner cues spades is it Axx which is good or KQJ which is bad? Maybe if playing ace first cues you are better off, but still partner can have like AQJx and you'd really want the qj be somewhere else. Or same if partner doesn't cue spades, you don't know if he has SQJx which are worthless or xxx and the 3 HCP in more useful positions.

 

 

Splinter when you want to tell your partner what you have. Use Jacoby 2nt when you want to ask partner what he has. Different situations.

2/1 with hands with a fit where you want to show a good side suit.

 

Decide if you want to show or you want to ask. Not liking splinters on the appropriate hands is kind of a sign that you don't trust your partner to evaluate their hand opposite, and would prefer to mastermind by trying to figure out what they have. But J2nt standard approaches won't tell you whether partner has a good holding or bad holding opposite your shortness. Usually distributional hands should want to tell, balanced hands should ask. Only don't splinter if you are too strong to splinter (you feel you want to keep going after partner's signoff, but not really strong enough to insist on slam, maybe ~15+HCP), or have a good 5+ minor you want to emphasize.

[smerriman]

Thanks. I've yet to see a compelling reason why I should use up all this bidding room to describe a hand that can be bid with a 2/1 or Jacoby 2nt raise.

Splinters make the following hands trivial to bid to game and slam respectively. What would your auctions be?

[hv=?s=SQJ76HA73D2CKJ876&n=SAK982H62DK653CA2&d=N&a=1SP]290|220[/hv]

[hv=?s=SQJ76HA73D2CKJ876&n=SAK982HK2D7653CA2&d=N&a=1SP]290|220[/hv]

[Winstonm]

Thanks. I've yet to see a compelling reason why I should use up all this bidding room to describe a hand that can be bid with a 2/1 or Jacoby 2nt raise.

J2n is best when used with a balanced hand that has 4-card support. A splinter emphasizes the ruffing value of your hand. A suit bid should emphasize length tricks if you also have support for opener’s major,

 

Only J2n is an asking bid - the others are describing

[johnu]

Only J2n is an asking bid - the others are describing

Very true for standard Jacoby 2NT.

 

I play a version where either partner can describe their hands.

[Winstonm]

Very true for standard Jacoby 2NT.

 

I play a version where either partner can describe their hands.

So 2n starts a relay?

[jillybean]

I appreciate the comments, thanks. It appears that my dislike of splinters is due to a misunderstanding and misuse, overuse of them.

I also play an extended J2N , so I'm not sure how much we lose out on if not playing splinters with the min gf hands.

[johnu]

So 2n starts a relay?

Opener can reply 3♣ which asks responder to describe their hand, either balanced or (void or singleton) somewhere.

 

Otherwise, opener can describe their hand if they think that is best.

[DavidKok]

I appreciate the comments, thanks. It appears that my dislike of splinters is due to a misunderstanding and misuse, overuse of them.

I also play an extended J2N , so I'm not sure how much we lose out on if not playing splinters with the min gf hands.

It might be helpful to consider the historical context in which splinters were popularised. I think this was during the era that people bid 1M-3M with 4(+) support and a GF hand, over which it is very difficult to have a scientific slam auction. Splinters were a big improvement on this by pinpointing shortness and excluding hand types from the jump raise. (Please correct me if this story is inaccurate, I recall reading this at some point but don't remember what my source is).

In the modern day we have different tools (J2N, 2♣ GF not promising length) for some strong hands with support, so the pressure to play splinter bids is not as great. But it doesn't make a lot of sense to play 1M-4X as anything else (or 1♥-3♠, for that matter), so the convention perseveres. And, if it is tightly defined, it is a very useful tool.

 

I've personally also gotten a lot of mileage out of opener splintering on the second round - say 1♦-1♠; 3♥ - or splintering in contested auctions such as 1♦-(P)-1♥-(X); 4♣. These splinters are slightly wider range for me, but narrowly define partner's shape shape and establish that it is our deal. My double and forcing pass are locked and loaded if the opponents bid on, and the defence practically plays itself even if partner has a king less than expected.

[mikl_plkcc]

In my system, only 1♠ is constructive. Any jump in the first round of auction is preemptive.

 

That is, all of 2♠, 3♠ and 4♠ are preemptive here.

 

I don't see the value of splinters as we can always use other forcing bids to set trump agreements and start cuebidding afterwards.

[Winstonm]

In my system, only 1♠ is constructive. Any jump in the first round of auction is preemptive.

 

That is, all of 2♠, 3♠ and 4♠ are preemptive here.

 

I don't see the value of splinters as we can always use other forcing bids to set trump agreements and start cuebidding afterwards.

 

The value of a splinter comes comes with the knowledge that the high cards are outside the splinter suit.

 

If your splinter range is 12-14, then AJ10xx, Kx, KQx, xxx becomes an encouraging slam hand opposite a 4C splinter.

 

The problem IMO is the overuse of splinters and misunderstanding their nature as a card-location bid not a shape-showing bid.

[apollo1201]

I don't see the value of splinters as we can always use other forcing bids to set trump agreements and start cuebidding afterwards.

I think smerriman gave a good example. Cueing a K or a sg will always be a cue and partner will not always (unless they have AK) know what it is. Then what, are my KQx good facing the ace, or are they useless, and these 5 points will be lacking in other suits to make the slam good.

 

That is where the « tight definition » that other posters mentionned plays its role. Splinters need to convey a well and narrowly defined strength (but sufficient for game obviously!) meaning « partner, if you have no wasted points facing my shortness and the overall appropriate strength for slam, knowing how much I have outside the shortage, then slam might be on, let’s investigate, but otherwise, just bid game and make it😉 ».

 

Therefore I think splinters are useful to the extent they are properly used and not just bid for the pleasure of making an extravagant jump and show to the opps look how clever I am I know a convention you guys might not know.

[Douglas43]

It might be helpful to consider the historical context in which splinters were popularised. I think this was during the era that people bid 1M-3M with 4(+) support and a GF hand, over which it is very difficult to have a scientific slam auction. Splinters were a big improvement on this by pinpointing shortness and excluding hand types from the jump raise. (Please correct me if this story is inaccurate, I recall reading this at some point but don't remember what my source is).

In the modern day we have different tools (J2N, 2♣ GF not promising length) for some strong hands with support, so the pressure to play splinter bids is not as great. But it doesn't make a lot of sense to play 1M-4X as anything else (or 1♥-3♠, for that matter), so the convention perseveres. And, if it is tightly defined, it is a very useful tool.

 

I've personally also gotten a lot of mileage out of opener splintering on the second round - say 1♦-1♠; 3♥ - or splintering in contested auctions such as 1♦-(P)-1♥-(X); 4♣. These splinters are slightly wider range for me, but narrowly define partner's shape shape and establish that it is our deal. My double and forcing pass are locked and loaded if the opponents bid on, and the defence practically plays itself even if partner has a king less than expected.

 

In the UK in the 70's 1M-3M was (is) a limit raise and 1M - 4m was a convention called Swiss showing game raises with different levels of controls. There were various versions, the Bridge Bum site gives a couple which were used in the USA: Swiss Raises Bridge Convention - Bidding and Responses (bridgebum.com.

 

Jacoby and splinters is much better.

 

I play a simple approach with 4+ card support: A splinter is about 8-12 hcp, singleton or void and no really good suit of my own. Jacoby is 12+ hcp but a bit stodgy. Change of suit followed by game bid (or game force sequence showing support) is an old-fashioned "delayed game raise" showing a good 5 card suit of my own as a potential source of tricks (think passed hand jump shift but about an Ace stronger).

 

On a good day you can "DGR" and splinter on the same hand: 1H-2C-2H-4D "I have good clubs, short diamonds and heart support". See my response to this hand from AL78 Missed slam (X-IMPS) - BBO Discussion Forums (bridgebase.com)