[Free]

The auction goes:
1♥ - 2♣ - pass - 2♦
pass - 2♥ - Dbl - 3♠
pass - ?

How many ♠s and ♦s does partner have at least?

[jtfanclub]

Free, on Aug 10 2007, 05:08 AM, said:

The auction goes:
1♥ - 2♣ - pass - 2♦
pass - 2♥ - Dbl - 3♠
pass - ?

How many ♠s and ♦s does partner have at least?

I'm not at all used to a spade jump there showing spades...2♠ should be forcing, so there's no point in a spade-showing jump.

Guess that's just another case of my not knowing 'standard'.

[FrancesHinden]

2S would show spades.
Therefore 3S shows a spade shortage.

[skjaeran]

FrancesHinden, on Aug 10 2007, 02:28 PM, said:

2S would show spades.
Therefore 3S shows a spade shortage.

Do you play the cuebid as showing ♣-support then?
If so, a splinter is logical.

If 2♥ is just a general GF, no suit has been supported, and it's not clear which suit is supposed to be trumps. You can play 3♠ as a self-splinter agreeing ♣'s (for the time being?), but that seems strange to me.

[lowerline]

Free, on Aug 10 2007, 05:08 AM, said:

The auction goes:
1♥ - 2♣ - pass - 2♦
pass - 2♥ - Dbl - 3♠
pass - ?

How many ♠s and ♦s does partner have at least?

I interpret the bidding as follows:
2♦ = natural F1
2♥ = maximum overcall, making the bidding GF

There is no fit established yet. Partner can bid 3♣ to set clubs, bid 2♠ to show a 4crd spade suit. 3♠ looks to me like a 5crd spade suit (and 6crd diamonds as a result). Something fancy like an autosplinter (setting diamonds) is far from standard.

Steven

[jtfanclub]

lowerline, on Aug 10 2007, 10:35 AM, said:

I interpret the bidding as follows:
2♦ = natural F1
2♥ = maximum overcall, making the bidding GF

There is no fit established yet. Partner can bid 3♣ to set clubs, bid 2♠ to show a 4crd spade suit. 3♠ looks to me like a 5crd spade suit (and 6crd diamonds as a result).

If you don't play it as Splinter, how about it showing spades well stopped asking about a heart stopper? Of if you use 3♥ for that, then the reverse?

If a jump to 3 spades shows 6-5, what would 2 spades followed by 3 spades show? 3 spades just uses so much space in a GF auction.

[ralph23]

We would play the 2♥ cuebid as a raise of advancer's suit, ♦.

2♠ over 2♥ would be a cuebid, showing 1st or 2nd round control of ♠.

So we have no use for 3♠, except as natural, showing 4 of them (with 5-5 in the pointies, partner would have responded in ♠, not ♦).

But my first thought is that partner's gotten confused.

[goodwintr]

It doesn't mean anything. Well, it means something to partner, and I am sure he will tell you what it should have meant to you, after the deal. No partnership can discuss all possible sequences, and to spring this one on an unsuspecting partner is . . . well . . . cruel and unusual.

[ArtK78]

I agree that it is cruel, but it is hardly unusual.

Therefore, there is no constitutional prohibition.

[lowerline]

jtfanclub, on Aug 10 2007, 10:58 AM, said:

lowerline, on Aug 10 2007, 10:35 AM, said:

I interpret the bidding as follows:
2♦ = natural F1
2♥ = maximum overcall, making the bidding GF

There is no fit established yet. Partner can bid 3♣ to set clubs, bid 2♠ to show a 4crd spade suit. 3♠ looks to me like a 5crd spade suit (and 6crd diamonds as a result).

If you don't play it as Splinter, how about it showing spades well stopped asking about a heart stopper? Of if you use 3♥ for that, then the reverse?

If a jump to 3 spades shows 6-5, what would 2 spades followed by 3 spades show? 3 spades just uses so much space in a GF auction.

It can only be a splinter if it sets a fit at the same time (since there was no fit established before). Asking for a heart stopper, doesn't make sense at all, since partner is already asking this question with 2♥. 2♠ is the reverse. 3♠ is the jump reverse.
Only if 2♥ had set diamonds (wasn't mentioned in original post), 3♠ is clearly a splinter. 3♠ as a splinter setting diamonds is far fetched IMHO. The natural meaning, showing 5♠6♦ is the most likely one. (Note: 2♠ followed by 3♠ would have shown a 6crd spade suit, nothing about the diamonds)

Steven

[downagain]

When the tray came back to me.. I thought 3S could have only been with a 6-5 hand. Why would you else take away so much bidding space? As 2S over 2H would have been clearly forcing.

I agree that with 6-5 one can still bid 2S, and rebid S the next round. But still other alternatives than 6-5 don't make much sense to me. Partner had a lot of C raises avaiable the previous round so splinter with C support seems unlikely.

I don't see why one would jump to 3S with only a 5-4 hand? The only reasonable thing left to me is an autosplinter with diamonds. But as I didn't even consider this at the table, I bid 4H over 3S with:

Kx xxxx AKQxx Kx

Partner did have a 6-5 hand with even a heart void, but he thought he had only shown a 5-4 hand.. so he jumped to 5S.

I correct to 6D which made as S splitted 3-3 if I remember well.. imps to the good guys..the other table went somehow one down in 4S

[the hog]

Quote: "When the tray came back to me.. I thought 3S could have only been with a 6-5 hand. Why would you else take away so much bidding space? As 2S over 2H would have been clearly forcing.

I agree that with 6-5 one can still bid 2S, and rebid S the next round. But still other alternatives than 6-5 don't make much sense to me. Partner had a lot of C raises avaiable the previous round so splinter with C support seems unlikely."
They make a lot of sense to me!

Firstly I will assume that you are playing 2D as forcing here. Not everyone plays a change of suit after an overcall as forcing.

The 2H bid does not necessarily show D support. With D support why not raise D. I would consider 2H asking for a H stopper.

I agree with Harald's comments above - the 3S bid has to be a splinter. Even if 2H did not agree C, I would take the 3S bid to be an autosplinter.

To jump around like this to show a 6-5 shape takes up so much bidding room and is clumsy to say the least.

[han]

First, I agree that 2H did not set trump.

Second, I agree that we are in a gameforcing auction so 2S would be forcing, and with 5-6 partner could easily start with 2S followed by 3S.

And finally, I have no agreement about 3S and it could be played in several different ways. It could be a splinter for clubs, or it could be a splinter for diamonds, the second one seems more reasonable to me. However, I wouldn't expect partner to try this on me at the table.

Therefore, if one of us bid this undiscussed at the table, I would expect a 5-6 hand. I would expect a picture bid hand for this, so two very good suits and not much else.

I could make a case for not using this bid when undiscussed.

[downagain]

Hannie, on Aug 13 2007, 10:31 AM, said:

First, I agree that 2H did not set trump.

Second, I agree that we are in a gameforcing auction so 2S would be forcing, and with 5-6 partner could easily start with 2S followed by 3S.

And finally, I have no agreement about 3S and it could be played in several different ways. It could be a splinter for clubs, or it could be a splinter for diamonds, the second one seems more reasonable to me. However, I wouldn't expect partner to try this on me at the table.

Therefore, if one of us bid this undiscussed at the table, I would expect a 5-6 hand. I would expect a picture bid hand for this, so two very good suits and not much else.

I could make a case for not using this bid when undiscussed.

Exactly

[Free]

♣s were also 3-3

[the hog]

downagain, on Aug 13 2007, 03:42 PM, said:

Hannie, on Aug 13 2007, 10:31 AM, said:

First, I agree that 2H did not set trump.

Second, I agree that we are in a gameforcing auction so 2S would be forcing, and with 5-6 partner could easily start with 2S followed by 3S.

And finally, I have no agreement about 3S and it could be played in several different ways. It could be a splinter for clubs, or it could be a splinter for diamonds, the second one seems more reasonable to me. However, I wouldn't expect partner to try this on me at the table.

Therefore, if one of us bid this undiscussed at the table, I would expect a 5-6 hand. I would expect a picture bid hand for this, so two very good suits and not much else.

I could make a case for not using this bid when undiscussed.

Exactly

If you are referring to the 6-5 shape, then to say "exactly" here is a silly comment when at least 4 posters think it must be a splinter. If your comment refers to using an undiscussed bid, then I am inclined to agree.

[downagain]

I mentioned in my post that autosplinter with diamonds is a plausible alternative.. but I meant that at the table nothing else made sense to me than a 6-5 hand.

[cherdano]

Btw, when you make such a jump to show a 6-5, you should really only do it when you think partner will understand it, so that after you made it you trust that partner will know you have a 6-5. Especially when you have an easy alternative showing such a hand, i.e. bidding 2S then jumping to 4S next round.