[han]

foo, on Jul 7 2007, 07:57 AM, said:

Hannie, on Jul 7 2007, 07:49 AM, said:

Assuming that 4D is a splinter, why are so many people who want to force to game rejecting this option?

Because a splinter is basically a shape based slam probe that promises a 9+ card trump fit.

I don't get your point so you'll have to spell it out for me.

Is this hand not good enough?

Do we need more trumps?

[han]

helene_t, on Jul 7 2007, 10:24 AM, said:

If 4♦ must be a splinter due to my failure to bid before, then 3/4♣ must be a fitbid by the same argument. I'll bid some clubs if p is on that wavelength as well.

Otherwise I just bid 4♥. Neandertal bidding always has its charm.

Maybe I need coffee, I can't even follow Helene's logic!

I do agree that 4C can hardly be a splinter because we didn't make a TO double last round, but why is 3C necessarily a fitbid? Can't it be whatever you play (1C) - 1H - (p) - 3C as?

And I still don't understand why you would bid 4H when 4D is so much more descriptive.

[helene_t]

Hannie, on Jul 7 2007, 07:27 PM, said:

why is 3C necessarily a fitbid? Can't it be whatever you play (1C) - 1H - (p) - 3C as?

Depends what 3♣ would normally mean. Assuming that it would be a general constructive raise to the 3-level, yes, it could be that as well, unless we use 2N or 2♠ for that.

[foo]

Hannie, on Jul 7 2007, 12:22 PM, said:

foo, on Jul 7 2007, 07:57 AM, said:

Hannie, on Jul 7 2007, 07:49 AM, said:

Assuming that 4D is a splinter, why are so many people who want to force to game rejecting this option?

Because a splinter is basically a shape based slam probe that promises a 9+ card trump fit.

I don't get your point so you'll have to spell it out for me.

Is this hand not good enough?

Do we need more trumps?

Sorry, other responsibilities kept me from the forums for awhile.

♠ QT2 ♥ KJ93 ♦ 2 ♣ AKT82

Fine splinter opposite an opening bid... ...but pd didn't open, they balanced.
pd's balance can effectively be forced on some hands considerably weaker than an opening bid.

I want to be stronger, or be more shapely, or to have the shortness in Their Suit opposite a balancing 1♥ by pd for a splinter.
So swap the red suits or give me one less loser and I'd Splinter.

Since slams are rarer after They have opened the bidding in most "up the middle" systems, and since "hanging pd" is to be avoided,

I'm not making any slam probes with this hand, I'm simply bidding game.
I think that's the practical percentage action with this hand.

[Edmunte1]

My bid was 4♦, splinter, and no extras (14- hcp). LHO bid 4♠ and my partner who held

---

bid 5♥, one down. He considered 4♦ not a good bidding argueing that it should show controls in both black suits, and considering 3♣ then game as a much better bid.
What's your opinion about this?

[Codo]

His argument is silly. Your splinter shows a hand that is game forcing and limited.
F.E. Axx,AKxx,x,xxxxx is perfect for this bid.

His 5 Heart bis was weird. He has 9 of his 11 HCPS in your shortness. That makes no good game but a great defence.

[SoTired]

I see nothing wrong with a 4D splinter. You have the right strength and the right distribution. 3C fit-jump may work out better or worse depending on partner's hand. In this case, either should get the same result.

5H is poor, since the defense is likely to take the 1st 3 diam tricks with a possible uppercut on the 4th round. 5H has no guarentees.

[mike777]

Edmunte1, on Jul 5 2007, 08:00 AM, said:

You hold in second seat, at unfavorable:
<!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> East </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> N/S </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> Q102 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> KJ93 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> 2 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> AK1082 </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end -->
And bidding goes:
(1♣) - pass - (pass) - 1♥
(1♠) -  ?

- 1♠ promises at least 4-4 in the black suits
What's your choice now and why?

I repeat i bid one heart here....overcall

I do not understand the rest of the bidding.

If you are going to pass 13 hcp unbalanced hands...good luck.
4) we non bio majors wonder about ...extreme tails and if bell curves=junk science.

[nige1]

Edmunte1, on Jul 5 2007, 08:00 AM, said:

You hold in second seat, at unfavorable:

Scoring: IMP

♠	65
♥	Q10872
♦	AKQ75
♣	3

 

---

bid 5♥, one down. He considered 4♦ not a good bidding argueing that it should show controls in both black suits, and considering 3♣ then game as a much better bid.
What's your opinion about this?

Because your splinter highlighted the ♦ duplication, partner has an easy double of 4♠. 3♣ would have been almost as effective on this deal.

This shows the advantage of a descriptive 4♦ splinter or 3♣ fit-jump over a lazy 2♠ or 4♥ bid

As Robson and Segal point out: splinters and fit jumps can help you explore for slams, but their main pay-off is to provide useful information on which to base judgment decisions in competitive auctions

[han]

Jlall, on Jul 9 2007, 04:02 AM, said:

Hannie, on Jul 7 2007, 07:49 AM, said:

Assuming that 4D is a splinter, why are so many people who want to force too game rejecting this option?

It uses up a ton of room and doesn't give partner any clue what to do as I suspect your range of hands you would do this on is pretty vast. Our honor location will matter a lot to partner. I think just saying 4D WTP i have a GF with short diamonds and 4 trumps is lazy.

Hey, I never said wtp, and I also didn't think wtp . You bid 2S, but most bid 4H which uses up the same amount of space and says much less. I agree with you that 4D is not all-telling, the clubs are a lot stronger than the spades and we could be a bit better than this (but partner would not expect a hand that is MUCH better than this imo).

I'm not convinced that you will be able to paint a better picture of your hand starting with 2S. But maybe partner will be able to show his hand, so I can definitely see advantages to the slow road.

I agree with nige1 that partner has an obvious double of 4S.

[pclayton]

I think 4♦ is a great call. If pard holds something like: x, AQxxxx, Kxxxx, x carrying on to 5♥ looks like the right plan over 4♠, even with the wastage. Switch the ♦K to the A, and we might have a perfecto slam too.

I don't think 4♦ is lazy at all, but thats how I'd characterize 2♣ or 2♠, since it lets in LHO cheaply.

Agree with Han that double of 4♠ is indicated. Ironically enough, 5♥ looks normal if pard didn't splinter.