[tprhenr]

Hello,

I have been trying to read more and play more robot hands online, and I am curious how to spot the difference between a cue bid and a splinter bid in auctions where you've already agreed on a suit contract and you're investigating a slam. From what I can tell, they both involve bidding a new suit to tell partner something (either controls or shortness), but I am having a hard time understanding how you'd tell which is which--showing an ace vs. a singleton (likely a loser) in a particular side suit could potentially be very different pieces of information. For example: after a 1NT open and a Jacoby Transfer to 2S, responder bids 4C. Is that a splinter simply because of the jump? I've read that cue bids can also be jumps, hence the confusion.

Thanks!

[steve2005]

Splinters are jumps. Gib sometimes uses the word splinter in it's description of shortness bids that are non-jumps. This I believe is rare and is technically not the correct word to use.
When cue-bidding sometimes you are cue-bidding a void or singleton. This is where it gets confusing. You may not know whether it is an honour or shortness being shown. To find out asking for keycards or aces may help.This problem occurs with humans too isn't just Gib.

Cue-bidding is usually when bidding opponents suit, including a jump cue-bid. Showing controls is often referred to as cue-bidding.

[dokoko]

There are two notions called "Cue bid":
- bidding opponents suit as a general force - I think this is not what you are talking about;
- bidding a side-suit after agreeing a trump suit to show a control in the suit - this is what you seem to have in mind.

A Splinter bid is a bid showing shortness in the bid suit and agreeing a trump suit at the same time (if not agreed before). The purpose is helping partner to evaluate his hand and showing a control at the same time. If a shortness is present, it is usually helpful to start slam investigation with a Splinter.

A Splinter bid is usually a jump, but there are exceptions. Conversely a jump showing a control is usually a Splinter, but there are exceptions, too.

Your sequence 1NT-2H;2S-4C is used as a Splinter bid by most experts. To play it this way you should have an agreement on what to bid with a slammish hand containing 6 spades without a shortness. Without such an agreement, the mentioned sequence would show a control that might (but need not) be a shortness.

[Kapi Blas]

So at first let's look at this particular sequence 1NT - 2♥ - 2♠ - 4♣. Obviously it depends on agreements but it makes no sense to consider 4♣ as cue bid rather than splinter. By definition splinter is a double-jump bid in a side suit when you have already agreed your trumps and it's showing singleton or void. I believe 3♣ should be considered as cue bid because it doesn't take away our bidding space. It isn't bad if splinter takes a lot of space because it is much more descriptive than simply just a cue bid. The most important part about discovering whether the cue bid is showing shortness or 1st/2nd round control is base of your system. All professional partnerships can show almost exact shape of the openers hand if needed so it isn't hard for them to distinguish the type of cue bid because all the shortages were usually shown earlier. It is much harder when your opponents interfere and takes away you space and then you must guess whether the cue bid is shortage or control but sometimes you can deal with it in some specific situations:

1♠ - 3♦ - ?

For example here information about diamond shortness in the responders might be very needed.

4♣ - 12+ HCP with 3+♠, there is pretty much no need for this bid to show ♣, with strong single-suited hand with clubs you will double
4♦ - SPLINTER 12+ HCP ♠ fit and ♦ shortage

[Tramticket]

It is possible to have different agreements, but a common agreement is that a splinter is recognised as an "unnecessary jump" in a new suit. It shows a shortage in the suit bid and agrees partner's suit.

The auction 1NT, 2♦; 2♥, 4♣ is a slightly different case - it does not agree partner's suit. Some do play it as a self-splinter - i.e setting your own suit as trumps and showing a shortage. Others play the sequence as natural (showing a second five-card suit) or as a cue-bid showing a control. This is down to partnership agreement.

[GrahamJson]

Kapi Blas, on 2017-August-30, 07:02, said:

So at first let's look at this particular sequence 1NT - 2♥ - 2♠ - 4♣. Obviously it depends on agreements but it makes no sense to consider 4♣ as cue bid rather than splinter. By definition splinter is a double-jump bid in a side suit when you have already agreed your trumps and it's showing singleton or void. I believe 3♣ should be considered as cue bid because it doesn't take away our bidding space. It isn't bad if splinter takes a lot of space because it is much more descriptive than simply just a cue bid. The most important part about discovering whether the cue bid is showing shortness or 1st/2nd round control is base of your system. All professional partnerships can show almost exact shape of the openers hand if needed so it isn't hard for them to distinguish the type of cue bid because all the shortages were usually shown earlier. It is much harder when your opponents interfere and takes away you space and then you must guess whether the cue bid is shortage or control but sometimes you can deal with it in some specific situations:

1♠ - 3♦ - ?

For example here information about diamond shortness in the responders might be very needed.

4♣ - 12+ HCP with 3+♠, there is pretty much no need for this bid to show ♣, with strong single-suited hand with clubs you will double
4♦ - SPLINTER 12+ HCP ♠ fit and ♦ shortage

I think that there is some confusing stuff here. For example most would play 1NT - 2H -2S - 3C as natural, showing a club suit. It might be the first move on a good hand, but initially it would normally be taken as natural.

One simple definition of a splinter is a jump in a suit when a non jump would be forcing. However, even this is not completely accurate as many would play a jump on the first round (e.g 1H -2S) as a natural game force. In such case a double jump is needed for it to be a splinter.

[Joe_Old]

Just make sure that you aren't playing with an old-timer who plays a jump to 4♣ in a NT auction as Gerber. There are still a lot of us around.

[steve2005]

Kapi Blas, on 2017-August-30, 07:02, said:

1♠-(3♦)-
4♣ - 12+ HCP with 3+♠, there is pretty much no need for this bid to show ♣, with strong single-suited hand with clubs you will double

While this might be a nice agreement, I think a lot of people play this as clubs.
Doubling with a strong 1-suiter is dangerous. If partner leaves in could be wrong spot. Also, some people don't play negative doubles that high, though most I think do.

[Kapi Blas]

steve2005, on 2017-August-30, 14:48, said:

While this might be a nice agreement, I think a lot of people play this as clubs.
Doubling with a strong 1-suiter is dangerous. If partner leaves in could be wrong spot. Also, some people don't play negative doubles that high, though most I think do.

I can't imagine my partner leaving 3♦ after my double unless he has some 5-5 shape with ♦. How often penalty double can be used in this situation? Rarely i belive.
That's why by agreement in my partnership all doubles to preempts are takeout except of for example this situation.

1♠ - 2♥ - 4♠ - pass
pass - ?

double - showing strong hand with some defensive tricks, partner decides if he wants to go higher or play 4♠ doubled

[Kapi Blas]

Quote

The auction 1NT, 2♦; 2♥, 4♣ is a slightly different case - it does not agree partner's suit. Some do play it as a self-splinter - i.e setting your own suit as trumps and showing a shortage. Others play the sequence as natural (showing a second five-card suit) or as a cue-bid showing a control. This is down to partnership agreement.

If 4♣ would be showing 5-5 shape and 3♣ 5-4 shape what would be 2NT used for?

[Kapi Blas]

GrahamJson, on 2017-August-30, 08:57, said:

I think that there is some confusing stuff here. For example most would play 1NT - 2H -2S - 3C as natural, showing a club suit. It might be the first move on a good hand, but initially it would normally be taken as natural.

One simple definition of a splinter is a jump in a suit when a non jump would be forcing. However, even this is not completely accurate as many would play a jump on the first round (e.g 1H -2S) as a natural game force. In such case a double jump is needed for it to be a splinter.

You are obviously right. It depends on agreements and 3♣ as natural is probably the better use in this case but i think you need to have some tools to know when the actual cue bidding starts after this sequence. I'm really curious why people bid 2♠ instead of 1♠ with GF hand. I can't see any advantages of taking away so much bidding space.

[Tramticket]

Kapi Blas, on 2017-August-31, 01:45, said:

If 4♣ would be showing 5-5 shape and 3♣ 5-4 shape what would be 2NT used for?

Natural, showing a balanced invitational hand with a five-card heart suit - seems obvious?

[dokoko]

Honestly I don't think OP is interested in sophisticated treatments to distinguish 54 from 55 hands or the like. Using a competitive non jump as control showing with no established fit wasn't what he wanted to learn.

So either keep things simple or start a new thread.

[hamish32]

A couple of things to resolve confusion:

Gib is not able to evaluate his hand accurately after a splinter so it is better when playing with gib not to splinter - also if gib splinters don't offer a cue bid as gib is unable to evaluate his hand opposite your cue. With gib stick with key card where you are in control.

That said it is useful if you have a regular partner to develop some meta agreements about splinters and cue bids so that you can work out at the table what a bid means.

our agreements:

1: A double jump is a splinter showing a 9 card fit and agreeing the last suit bid as trumps.
2: A new suit at the 4 level is a cue showing first or second round control (shortage if its a jump but it can be a shortage or an A or K if its a non-jump).
3: In a game forcing auction agreeing our suit at the 3 level demands cue bidding and denies a shortage (some people play requests cue bidding).
4: A new suit at the 3 level is natural and forcing (some/most play game forcing at the 3 level so that a new suit at the 4 level is then agreeing the last suit bid as trumps and cuing).

with these meta-rules all the auctions above in the list can be understood.

1NT - 2♥
2♠ - 3♣

slam interest with 5♠4+♣

1NT - 2♥
2♠ - 4♣

slam interest 6+♠ short ♣ no second suit.

1♠ - (3♦) - 4♣

here with no room to bid a new suit at the 3 level I think it depends on your agreements about X being takeout. In my partnership its very good ♣ bad ♠ (I can bid 4♠ to play game there and 4NT to key card for ♠ - also X is takeout so we have many options but I need to be able to show single suited GF with ♣ when I am unwilling for partner to pass a X with a ♦ stack.