[nekthen]

---

1c could be 2 cards

[Tramticket]

1S. I'm not doubling with a void.

[hrothgar]

If 1!C promises 3+ clubs I might consider a raise, but since it only promises two, I think that I will bid my six card spade suit at the one level, planning to then show my heart suit...

[johnu]

Does 2♦ ask opener to bid NT with a stopper so we can get to 3NT?

[mcphee]

what difference does it make about how many C they have. We are 6-6 in the majors, so the plan should be to TELL partner. Bid S then H.

[FelicityR]

Except if I have a 4♦ bid available on my convention card as a form of modified Leaping Michael's showing specifically 8-10 HCPs and 6/6M with a void in ♦s, I'm just going to bid a paltry 1♠. I might mention ♥s later if I feel in an optimistic mood...

[pescetom]

Our 2♦ excludes majors, 3♦ is transfer to 3N and 4♦ is RKCB, so no luck there. Double does not do justice to this hand either, so I guess I'm stuck with 1♠.

[Trinidad]

hrothgar, on 2020-March-10, 18:42, said:

If 1!C promises 3+ clubs I might consider a raise, but since it only promises two, I think that I will bid my six card spade suit at the one level, planning to then show my heart suit...

I think that a five loser hand is good enough for a splinter, rather than a mundaine raise.

Rik

[Povratnik]

Trinidad, on 2020-March-11, 13:58, said:

I think that a five loser hand is good enough for a splinter, rather than a mundaine raise.

A splinter with TWO shortnesses? A splinter without established (or at least implied) fit? I can't say it's bad (now), since neither of the ideas has/have ever crossed my mind...

1♠ is a very plausible bid, but I'm still surprised by such overwhelming 'win' in this 'poll'. If I played with robot, or with some random 'one evening' human partner, I'd also bid 1♠. However, in any kind of real partnership, I'd bid diamond. 2♦, 3♦ or 4♦, depending on specific and overall partnership agreements.

[Cyberyeti]

Povratnik, on 2020-March-11, 19:49, said:

A splinter with TWO shortnesses? A splinter without established (or at least implied) fit? I can't say it's bad (now), since neither of the ideas has/have ever crossed my mind...

1♠ is a very plausible bid, but I'm still surprised by such overwhelming 'win' in this 'poll'. If I played with robot, or with some random 'one evening' human partner, I'd also bid 1♠. However, in any kind of real partnership, I'd bid diamond. 2♦, 3♦ or 4♦, depending on specific and overall partnership agreements.

Why ? these are club raises of differing types for us

[nekthen]

I think there is room for this general structure after 1x 1y :-
2y good raise to 3x
3y splinter
4y 5+ 5+ in unbid suits

Why not?

[pescetom]

nekthen, on 2020-March-12, 03:10, said:

I think there is room for this general structure after 1x 1y :-
2y good raise to 3x
3y splinter
4y 5+ 5+ in unbid suits
Why not?

Because there are things that are arguably more useful than splinter for a minor or unlikely 5 5, like asking for a stop in y, transfer to 3nt with a stop in y, Kickback in x.

[Tramticket]

nekthen, on 2020-March-12, 03:10, said:

I think there is room for this general structure after 1x 1y :-
2y good raise to 3x
3y splinter
4y 5+ 5+ in unbid suits

Why not?

You want to skip three rounds of bidding to tell partner that you have a misfit? And you expect to find the best strain and level?

[Povratnik]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-March-12, 02:54, said:

these are club raises of differing types for us

Why? I mean - why are you spending these useful bids on such a thing as raising partner's two cards long suit? What is the purpose of 2♣ and 3♣ bids for you?

Cyberyeti, on 2020-March-12, 02:54, said:

Povratnik, on 2020-March-11, 19:49, said:

A splinter with TWO shortnesses? A splinter without established (or at least implied) fit? I can't say it's bad (now), since neither of the ideas has/have ever crossed my mind...

1♠ is a very plausible bid, but I'm still surprised by such overwhelming 'win' in this 'poll'. If I played with robot, or with some random 'one evening' human partner, I'd also bid 1♠. However, in any kind of real partnership, I'd bid diamond. 2♦, 3♦ or 4♦, depending on specific and overall partnership agreements.

Why ?

I expressed (or implied) several opinions in my post. Don't know which one is addressed by your "why". If you had in mind my post as a whole, I could try to explain, but it will be much easier (and clearer) if you ask more specific question(s).
(Perhaps I can say one thing now (though I thought it's obvious) - my diamond bid means: "Bid your better major".)

* * *

nekthen, on 2020-March-12, 03:10, said:

I think there is room for this general structure after 1x 1y :-
2y good raise to 3x
3y splinter
4y 5+ 5+ in unbid suits

That general structure beautifully applies on major suits. Less beautifully on diamonds. Not beautifully on clubs...

nekthen, on 2020-March-12, 03:10, said:

Why not?

Can't calculate the probabilities right now, but intuitively, I think that you'll have the right distribution in less than one time in twenty. That's too seldom. (Right distribution - six clubs with 322 or 331 in other suits)

That's not the strongest reason, but it would be impractical for me to write a novel, not knowing your system and trying to cover all possibilities. Could you tell me what 2♣ and 3♣ bids mean in your system?

[Cyberyeti]

My why was to the second point, I couldn't see why you were surprised, 1♠ is beyond obvious.

Admittedly the reason we have all these club raises is because we play a 4 card club rather than 2.

[pescetom]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-March-12, 08:11, said:

Admittedly the reason we have all these club raises is because we play a 4 card club rather than 2.

I don't think an artificial raise of a 2+ club is pointless, though. Neither has promised a real clubs suit (responder had the alternative of 2♣ which is forcing) so the main purpose is to exclude a 4-card major and put the bad guy on lead to our possible NT contract.

[Povratnik]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-March-12, 08:11, said:

My why was to the second point, I couldn't see why you were surprised, 1♠ is beyond obvious.

Admittedly the reason we have all these club raises is because we play a 4 card club rather than 2.

Huh, I don't know what to say... The answer to your question is pretty much in the paragraph after which you asked why; I would have to repeat some parts of the text. It might be my bad English.

And yes, 1♠ is beyond obvious, if que bid and double are out of the question. But they aren't...

[Cyberyeti]

Povratnik, on 2020-March-12, 11:08, said:

Huh, I don't know what to say... The answer to your question is pretty much in the paragraph after which you asked why; I would have to repeat some parts of the text. It might be my bad English.

And yes, 1♠ is beyond obvious, if que bid and double are out of the question. But they aren't...

Double is completely out of the question, it's a good way to concede 1♦x= with a game or slam on.

There are other uses for the cuebid, and you certainly don't want to be jump cueing with possibly less than half the deck and a likely misfit.

[Povratnik]

I was talking about this very hand, where it's virtually impossible for my LHO to pass