[humilities]

Sectional swiss teams.

---

North: "I've already shown my values with the splinter. The singleton king is of dubious value, and I'm very concerned about trumps."

South: "I could have signed off over 3S, my 4D shows values and a decent hand for slam. I'm not the driver here."

***

Side question: what do you think of the 3S splinter?

[ArtK78]

I am not in love with the spade splinter. 3♦ followed by 4♥ gets the same message across.

I blame South entirely. North has shown game forcing values with some slam interest. South is looking at the AKQJx of hearts, and should know that North cannot possibly bid past 4♥ without a heart honor.

South is worth another bid. I would bid 5♥, for lack of an alternative. Whether this gets you to slam or not is another question. North should infer from the lack of a second cue bid that South has very good hearts, and this should be enough for slam.

[whereagles]

No blame. It's just another of those auctions plagued by the usual lack of systematics on control-showing bids.

[Cyberyeti]

What would 3N be from S ? I ask because for us it would be A♠, so if I can't cue that and can't cue clubs, my hearts must be pretty good. I'd then KC with the N hand and when S shows 3 I know it's ♥AKQ so I bid 6.

[humilities]

 ArtK78, on 2014-September-08, 08:13, said:

I am not in love with the spade splinter. 3♦ followed by 4♥ gets the same message across.

I held the South hand, my partner splintered (which might not have occurred to me) as I would have probably bid as you suggested. But the more I think about it, the more I like the splinter ... without it I could certainly see the auction continuing:

1H (1S) 2C
2H 3D
3Hor3S? 4H

Now, is 4H a slam try or an attempt to find a playable game? I'm glad at least the splitner aset trumps and made it easy.

 ArtK78, on 2014-September-08, 08:13, said:

I blame South entirely. North has shown game forcing values with some slam interest. South is looking at the AKQJx of hearts, and should know that North cannot possibly bid past 4♥ without a heart honor.

Yeah, holding the S hand I really felt like I had the right hand. But I also thought, heck what else could I have for this auction, shouldn't he be bidding RKC if he has so much? But you're right I certainly could have made one more try thanks for the feedback.

[EricK]

What would 2♠ by north on the second round show?

[Zelandakh]

North certainly did not show their values with the splinter. They have 17 plus a singleton. Even if you downgrade the ♠K to zero it is still an ace stronger than minimum. This is precisely the problem with wide-ranged splinters. From South's point of view, North might still have ♠K ♥xxxx ♦AQ ♣KJT9xx or ♠K ♥xxxxx ♦A ♣QJT9xx where 5♥ might go down. That said, if that is what South thought they were overly pessimistic. My guess is that they rather feared the lack of a club control, which is almost impossible aside from a made up construction such as the one above.

So as an ATB I think both contributed but South more than North.

[helene_t]

If 2♥ is nonforcing, which it probably is, then I do think North showed his values. He is showing slam interest opposite a minimum opener, despite having only 3-card support. So he must be quite strong.

I think the splinter is fine.

[mikeh]

I don't like the splinter, basically because I agree with Zel, in that splinters should be limited in range, else partner may well later be guessing, as indeed were both players.

2♠ is unambiguously forcing, and while it doesn't promise hearts for now, N can reasonably expect to catch up.

Over 2N, 3♥ would be a clear slam try, and I'd do that with the N hand even after S showed spade values.

Over 3♣, again 3♥ is a slam try

Over 3♥, possibly the only really regressive call, then I would keycard (after he bids the suit 3 times, I think xxx is adequate for the 5 level....he has no spade card so if he has a trump loser, he has a minor filler or 2)


N's hand really isn't a lot over the upper range for a splinter, because most of the time the spade K is worth very little more than an x, and the hearts are bad. However, N should have asked himself: which call is likelier to lead to an easy auction: 2 or 3♠ and I think it to be clear that 2♠ is going to be far easier on most layouts.

N has a complex hand with lots of values, and this suggests going slow rather than making a space-consuming call such as a splinter. Splinters, effective tho they can be, are best used to transfer control of the auction, at least temporarily, to partner, and thus should never hold undisclosed assets beyond those partner will be expecting.

[PhantomSac]

I'm ok with the splinter, I agree with zel and mike I just think that as mike said the SK and the 3 low hearts are bad enough that the hand is not that great. Also the lower the splinter the wider the range you can handle (for instance, 4D leaves you no room, so it should be tighter). I do think that over 4D north should just keycard, it is very likely partner has good trumps and the DK for his cooperation, I mean we are arguing the north hand is too strong to splinter, so when his partner cooperates he has to have something good. SA + 1 loser hearts + DK or 0 loser hearts + DK is already a decent slam. We might get too high opposite the SA and the CQ and the DKJ and decent but shaky hearts, but in that case south probably would have bid 2N over 2C instead of 2H unless he has 6 hearts (and if he has six hearts having 3 trump losers would be quite unlucky).

At the end of the day the splinter does get partner to evaluate everything correctly, good trumps and the DK and the CQ are big cards, the SA is good but not great, and other stuff is not. I think it should have gotten the job done here.

[mikestar13]

I don't mind the splinter, provided North is planning to keycard unless South shows total disinterest. (For us, that would be 3NT = much spade waste.)

[mike777]

40-40
20% rub of the green.
thanks for the post. A lot of red meat to discuss on this deal, good one.

A tough hand. A good hand to discuss later in the bar.

Not mentioned yet, north might start with a neg x but 2c is not bad.

after negx, 3s splinter and 4d north might try rkc but really a tough hand.

I don't mind the splinter so much but understand the theory of bidding 2s to conserve space, yet force, on what will be a tough hand to bid out.

[rmnka447]

There are 2 ways to show shortness in a suit -- use a splinter or bid the two suits held and then raise partner. Typically if you bid the suits and raise, you show a stronger hand than if you splinter. A splinter rebid, as in this contested auction, would typically show 3 trumps rather than a direct splinter which would show 4.

Let's look at North's hand. I wouldn't put much value on the ♠ K other than for a singleton. Nonetheless, North holds a good 14 count in the minors plus the singleton. So the hand certainly is more than a minimum -- certainly something like a very good 15 or 16 value.

IMHO, the hand is just a little below what's needed to bid out the pattern to show shortness. Change the ♠ K to a ♥ K with a ♠ stiff and I'd tip the other way. So, the splinter is fine with me.

If opener has been alert, and we should assume so, opener will know that the secondary splinter is based on 3 trump. Opener also will discount his hand if values other than the A are held in responder's short suit. As Mel Colchamiro (ACBL Bulletin columnist and noted bridge teacher) likes to say, opener should hold "All (the A) or nothing at all" in the short suit to consider a slam invitation opposite a splinter. The ♠ overcall would also seem to place some ♠ honors in overcaller's hand anyway.

Opener's 4 ♦ cue is a positive development. Opener has denied a ♣ control, so should have at least a doubleton ♣. If short in ♦s, then there must be a club fit. Opener could be 4-5-1-3 or possibly 3-5-1-4. Assuming opener doesn't have much wasted value in ♠s, opener has to have pretty decent ♥s to cue as only ♦ KJ and ♣ Q are available to provide the values for a slam positive move.

So, over 4 ♦, I think North has to make another move toward slam. As stated above, the hand has extras versus what could be splintered on. I'd be very tempted to bid 5 ♥ asking about the trump holding.

[Zelandakh]

 rmnka447, on 2014-September-10, 00:31, said:

There are 2 ways to show shortness in a suit -- use a splinter or bid the two suits held and then raise partner. Typically if you bid the suits and raise, you show a stronger hand than if you splinter.

There are plenty of examples where this is simply not true. It is true that you typically have to bid around a shortage when not playing maxi-splinters. The classical DGR, as one obvious example, does not show extras though and to suggest this as a rule is misleading.

 rmnka447, on 2014-September-10, 00:31, said:

Let's look at North's hand. I wouldn't put much value on the ♠ K other than for a singleton. Nonetheless, North holds a good 14 count in the minors plus the singleton. So the hand certainly is more than a minimum -- certainly something like a very good 15 or 16 value.

You seriously only value the singleton king as a single point? You might consider going back and reading some of Rainer's posts about the value of such distributional features. It is valuations like this that give the MLTC a good name.

[P_Marlowe]

If 4D showes the King of diamonds, as it should it is the first control showing
bid, Norths should move.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[rmnka447]

 Zelandakh, on 2014-September-10, 02:07, said:

You seriously only value the singleton king as a single point? You might consider going back and reading some of Rainer's posts about the value of such distributional features. It is valuations like this that give the MLTC a good name.

Well how much value are you going to place on a stiff K in a suit bid by the opponents? And how much value are you going to place on a stiff when holding only 3 trump? If you're a mechanical point counter, maybe you rate this hand at 19 or 20 points -- 3 points for the K and 3 for the singleton plus the other points in the hand.

To me, a better approach is to develop a base value for the hand -- worst case scenario, if you like -- and start from there. If subsequent bidding reveals that the ♠ K has some value, you can add it and adjust your bidding accordingly later in the auction. Typically, singletons are rated at 3 points when a fit is established and you are holding 4 trump. So, 3 trumps and a stiff ought to be a little less -- say 2 points rather than 3. That counts up to a pretty solid 16 value to start. (I'd certainly value a stiff K in a suit UNBID by the opponents more than just singleton value.)

BTW, in the context of the actual hand, the ♠ K is no better than a ♠ x.

AND, MLTC is just another tool like point count. Here responder has 6 losers and opener 7 losers, so that predicts the hand will make 11 tricks right? LOL! (I'll admit to using MLTC as much as point count.)

[yunling]

The range for 3♠ here is ambiguous. Just don't bid it if you have no discussion of that.

[Zelandakh]

 rmnka447, on 2014-September-12, 05:15, said:

If you're a mechanical point counter, maybe you rate this hand at 19 or 20 points -- 3 points for the K and 3 for the singleton plus the other points in the hand.

I doubt anyone would count this hand as 19 on this auction, let alone 20; but there are quite a few numbers between that and 15 and counting the shortage as 1 in combination with the ♠K + minor suit honour structure as 0 is unduly pessimistic. If you want me to put a specific number on it then counting everything together as +3 (17 total) seems closer to the mark.

[chasetb]

The splinter on the second round is perfect, but signing off over 4♦ is just criminal, whether it is LTTC or Diamond control. Full blame to North.

[rmnka447]

 Zelandakh, on 2014-September-12, 12:34, said:

I doubt anyone would count this hand as 19 on this auction, let alone 20; but there are quite a few numbers between that and 15 and counting the shortage as 1 in combination with the ♠K + minor suit honour structure as 0 is unduly pessimistic. If you want me to put a specific number on it then counting everything together as +3 (17 total) seems closer to the mark.

Fair enough, the difference between the base value (16) in my second response and your valuation (17) is certainly reasonable. Perhaps calling it a "very good 15 or 16" was a bit pessimistic.

The key is that the minimum value of the hand still puts it in a slam inquiry/positive range opposite a minimum.

An interesting side discussion might be about when it is right to show the splinter opposite an opener minimum response. If, say, responder held something like ♠ x ♥ xxx ♦ A10xx ♣ AKJxx, is that enough to still show the 3 trump splinter? And, what would be the maximum for the splinter, if any?

In any case, I can't imagine North stopping in 4 ♥ after South finds the 4 ♦ cue. North has controls in all the side suits (albeit just a 2nd in ♠). The only question is "Are there any trump losers?". Hence, the reason I choose to ask with 5 ♥.