[KurtGodel]

A world class player I know often says when he is teaching weaker players he says you need three things to bid a slam: 1) Good trumps 2) A trick source 3) Good controls. We have all of those things, if we splinter we will never mention our trick source, if we bid 2NT we probably don't get to mention our trick source and partner won't be able to tell us things that are helpful (perhaps we will be warned off slam when he has heart shortage).

The main disadvantage of bidding 2♥, is that partner is unlikely to play us for 4 trumps, but if they are open to this you should be okay. Also, you make it considerably easier to bid grand if partner has a monster. So I will try 2♥. I like splinters a lot, but tend to bid them when I am 4441 or when my 5 card suit is only good to fill holes in partner's hand, rather than trying to build tricks for ourselves.

[aguahombre]

KurtGodel, on 2015-May-03, 07:42, said:

The main disadvantage of bidding 2♥, is that partner is unlikely to play us for 4 trumps, but if they are open to this you should be okay. Also, you make it considerably easier to bid grand if partner has a monster. So I will try 2♥. I like splinters a lot, but tend to bid them when I am 4441 or when my 5 card suit is only good to fill holes in partner's hand, rather than trying to build tricks for ourselves.

Yes. Plus, on this particular hand, we can still splinter -- after partner's 2S rebid, and still not overstating our overall strength; just painting a full picture.

[Phil]

Don't like the splinter at all. The heart suit may be the key to the hand - would partner move over 4♦ with Kxxxxx Axx xx Ax?

Obviously 2♥ could work, but 2N isn't terrible - we might discover a stiff club, or extras, and partner can cue the ♥A if we get into a slower auction.

[Lovera]

Phil, on 2015-May-03, 09:49, said:

Don't like the splinter at all. The heart suit may be the key to the hand - would partner move over 4♦ with Kxxxxx Axx xx Ax?

Obviously 2♥ could work, but 2N isn't terrible - we might discover a stiff club, or extras, and partner can cue the ♥A if we get into a slower auction.

This hand ends in slam. For this aim is more indicate don't hide heart suit. About this situation - with an hand that have splinter bidding possibility already Benito Garozzo told - is better to bid 2♥. Fourthemore we can bid splinter subsequently. But yet if we don't splinter before RKC can bid after as answere to query for Q.

[Zelandakh]

Lovera, on 2015-May-01, 04:33, said:

It's better first estabilish a fit

Lovera, on 2015-July-12, 01:32, said:

This hand ends in slam. For this aim is more indicate don't hide heart suit.

Glad that is clear then!

[keylime]

I had a similar hand with my student recently, and she splintered. We missed an easy slam. Afterwards I said this:

"Wouldn't you like to tell pard more about your hand, instead of less?" She nodded. Then I explained that bidding her five card suit first (since we are playing 2/1) and then raising cheaply describes better her hand. I'm from the old school; splinters should deny nearly all hands with a five card side suit.

[Lovera]

keylime, on 2015-July-13, 09:29, said:

I had a similar hand with my student recently, and she splintered. We missed an easy slam. Afterwards I said this:

"Wouldn't you like to tell pard more about your hand, instead of less?" She nodded. Then I explained that bidding her five card suit first (since we are playing 2/1) and then raising cheaply describes better her hand. I'm from the old school; splinters should deny nearly all hands with a five card side suit.

I think at splinter as an "adjective" for the hand and to use when you have not a better descriptive (generically speaking) bidding. (En passant : i have used google translated for your post and finally the translation was interesting.)

[aguahombre]

Lovera, on 2015-July-13, 14:42, said:

I think at splinter as an "adjective" for the hand and to use when you have not a better descriptive (generically speaking) bidding. (En passant : i have used google translated for your post and finally the translation was interesting.)

What can we use to translate your posts?

[billw55]

I would think that often, perhaps even usually, when we might splinter, we will also have a good side suit.

[mikestar13]

I believe that OP means or should mean anti-(partnership-style)=not our partnership style, not (anti-partnership) style=disruptive to most partnerships. Given a choice of splinter vs Jacoby, I choose splinter. But I would prefer to be playing a style where I can bid 2♥.

[wank]

ignore this. i misread the hand.

[aguahombre]

billw55, on 2015-July-13, 15:22, said:

I would think that often, perhaps even usually, when we might splinter, we will also have a good side suit.

Yes, but the focus here is on a good side suit of 5+ cards. When that occurs, we believe the suit should be shown instead of the splinter. Some of these times we will be able to actually show the splinter later -- best of both worlds.

[phil_20686]

ahydra, on 2015-March-27, 04:41, said:

5cM, weak NT context. Both sides vul, matchpoints

---

Options are: 2NT = GF raise guaranteeing 4 card support, 4D = SPL, or some mastermind sequence via 2H (but that's anti-partnership-style).

This probably seems obvious to most of you - apologies if so. But it did generate a good amount of discussion after last night's game.

ahydra

I have never understood the arguments either side of the splinter vs not splinter debate.

Argument in favour of 2h:
You are showing partner you have a good side suit and a source of tricks.

Well I have several problems with this argument. Firstly, the hands they offer in support like the afore mentioned Kxxxxx Axx Axx x often look pretty good opposite a splinter, and secondly, they often rely on brining in the heart suit without a ruff in the long hand. E.g. KQxxx Axx xx Axx has a slow club loser whenever hearts are 4-1. Secondly, if I accept the validity of their arguments for bidding a "good suit", well AQx opposite Kxxxx is only marginally less likely than Axx opposite KQxxx, so surely they are also an argument for bidding virtually any five card suit with an honour in it? I mean, if the argument is really, its always good to bid our your pattern thats fine, but then why the emphasis on bidding "good" five card suits? Thirdly, what makes a good thin slam is usually the combination of shortage and honour concentration. Bidding your five card suit and then splintering later is obviously better than splintering at once, but lots of people don't have the option lots of the time. We would all love to bid 2h if partner is guaranteed to bid 2s, but what if he bangs down 3N with an 18-19 count and Axx diamond? How will we diagnose the position now? (Obviously that isnt great system but I betsome of the intermediate/advanced forum will bid that way, certainly it would be routine in english club bridge, though they don't play 2/1 as a rule). The splinter vs not splinter decision can only be made in the context of knowledge of the likely paths that the auction will take, which we almost never know in this kinda poll.

Argument in favour of splinter:
You can diagnose wasted values at once/most descriptive single bid.

This is a pretty sound argument. But of course, we don't usually get to make only one more bid necessarily. A splinter takes up a lot of room and so it should be fairly tightly defined. If you have 9 trumps, xxx opposite x, and 27 HCP, you usually have a small slam. Sure it might be on a finesse, but often its not. So its nice to diagnose this kind of situation. If you bid a good five card suit, but then partner bids a new suit, you can struggle potentially to diagnose this situation if you don't splinter. On the other hand, if you have s7 HCP and Axx opposite x, then you can struggle to get to 12 tricks unless you have a 5-3 side suit fit with honour concentration.

My opinion:
My decision on whether splinter is a good bid depends on how likely it is that you get to splinter later. I think that if you have a good chance of being able to splinter later, then you should bid 2h, if you think there is a good chance that in your system the singleton diamond will vanish into the ether, then you should splinter at once.

[mikeh]

deleted cheap shot post

[MrAce]

mikeh, on 2015-July-22, 09:32, said:

deleted cheap shot post

I think I know what it was.

[mikeh]

PhilG, I deleted a cheap shot response to your post because it seems to me that you made a valiant attempt at presenting your arguments on the relative merits of the splinter v 2♥ approach. I am therefore going to accept that you are genuinely trying to understand the issues.

I think the problem may be that you have only a limited understanding of the arguments in favour of the 2♥ response.

You say that, as you understand them, there is little reason why one should focus on suit quality...even Hxxxx should be enough since opener is almost as likely to hold AQx when responder has Kxxxx as he is to hold Axx when responder holds KQxxx. I disagree with you on that, just on frequency grounds, but that is not the main reason for arguing that the 2♥ response, when one has a legitimate choice between various options (here, splinter, 2H, and J2N) should be based on a good suit (which I would define for these purposes as a 2/3 top honours or better, 5 cards or longer...the OP suit is absolute minimum...see a more recent thread where I advocated a 2♦ response with a 5530 with Kxxxx in spades and KQJxx in diamonds).

While we would like to find partner with the Ace, on many layouts Jx or Jxx will suffice, and even xx is ok if he has good controls in the minors.

Another flaw in your understanding is your apparent belief that those who bid 2♥ do so because they intend to splinter later, and that an inconvenient rebid by opener (basically anything other than 2♠) renders that impossible.

I would cheerfully splinter over 2♠, and would consider that to be a near-perfect description of my hand, but I am not choosing 2♥ simply because I hope to be able to splinter. I hope, and expect, to be able to convey a lot of useful information over most of the more probable bids by partner.

Thus over 2N, surely a very frequent rebid, I can bid 3♠, indicating 5+ hearts, primary spades (could be 3 but could easily be 4, as here) and mild or better slam interest, all at the 3 level. Consider the information exchange compared to the immediate splinter.

You posit an awkward 3N rebid. Well, as a long time 2/1 player, in most partnerships we do NOT rebid 3N. There is little need. If we have the good 17 to 19 required for that call, and partner has made a gf opposite our possible 10-11 count, then we can be pretty confident we have safety beyond 3N, so we rebid 2N, as either too weak for 1N opening or too strong...with the latter hand, should partner sign off immediately, we bid one more. However, were partner to be one of those who likes 3N to be available, then presumably we have agreed upon a narrow range....I would expect precisely 17+-19 with exactly 5=2=3=3 shape. We can debate whether 4♠ by me should be forcing...I happen to think that it has to be, and that it will or should be safe to play it as such, given that we will have a good reason to pull 3N. But I recognize that there is room for discussion here,

Now, we can run into other awkward situations: say opener rebids 3♦. Now our 3♠ will appear to be a preference, not a slam try. We could bid 4♠, showing real support and 5+ hearts and a reason to bid 2♥ rather than either J2N or a splinter, but it is fair to say that we are now jamming our own auction.

So 2♥ is not always going to work well, but imo it stands more chance of leading to the optimal result, with relatively small risk of becoming unmanageable, than either of the plausible alternatives.

I hope you will read this as intended....to provide you with a deeper insight into the arguments for 2♥ than it seems you currently possess.

[billw55]

That is not PhilG.

[MrAce]

billw55, on 2015-July-22, 12:08, said:

That is not PhilG.

Knock on wood!!

[mikeh]

billw55, on 2015-July-22, 12:08, said:

That is not PhilG.

oops....my apologies to all concerned....I read the post way too quickly the first time

[rmnka447]

I would bid 2 ♥ on the hand.

If partner's rebid allows then a splinter rebid, that would describe the hand very well.

The problem with both J2N and a direct splinter is that they preclude identifying an important type of modest HCP slam going hands, the double fitted hand. Opener is allowed to have a ♥ fit on some hands after all. After,

1 ♠ - 2 ♥
3 ♥ - 3 ♠

Both partners become aware of the double fit. Either can explore to see if the side suit controls are there and total controls sufficient for slam. Additionally, opener will have a good sense of how to evaluate his ♥ holding.

Noting the weak NT context, give opener something like ♠ AQxxx ♥ J10x ♦ Axx ♣ AJx. After a 4 ♦ splinter, it may be difficult for opener to make a slam move. But after the double fit auction above, opener can visualize responder's ♥ holding being 5+ to 2 top honors, realize his ♥s are working cards, and find a ♣ cue.

Just for the record, had the original hand OP asked about been ♠ KJxx ♥ Qxxxx ♦ x ♣ KQx, I would have opted for a splinter. The ♥s just aren't good enough to worry about showing them.