[msjennifer]

nekthen, on 2018-September-01, 13:34, said:

Yes
Much the same as xxx - AKxx - Axxxx - x, or Kxx - AKxx - xxxxx - x, or even Kxx - Kxxxx - Axxx - x
Point is K♠ is just as good as an A but harder to identify, but xxx - AKxx - Kxxxx - x is useless

SIR,so perhaps you will agree that it is worthwhile to show the second round control in D AND the Spade Ace in a single bid of 4S the way WE do. I fully admit that not any of the other colleagues will agree with these bids and the justification therein neither shall I advice anyone to play our way.The splinter bid and the MINIMUM values required for it can vary from person to person and hence the discussion.A nice illustrative hand for this particular column.

[pescetom]

Winstonm, on 2018-September-01, 13:47, said:

I am of the opinion that a splinter range should be from a mild slam try to a strong slam try. Bidding splinter on some random 12 count that contains a singleton does more to help the defense IMO than the offense. When you eat up large amounts of bidding room, partner should be able to see a "picture" of your hand.

FWIW I am of the opposite opinion. There are many alternative ways of conveying a mild or strong slam try, none of which require or benefit from eating up large amounts of bidding room. The best justification for such an apparently paradoxical action is to preempt the opponents in a situation where they probably have game themselves and you have strength only in attack. As such I will cheerfully bid a splinter with values that do not quite guarantee game but do paint a "picture" of my hand and our limited options.

[ggwhiz]

pescetom, on 2018-September-01, 14:35, said:

FWIW I am of the opposite opinion. There are many alternative ways of conveying a mild or strong slam try, none of which require or benefit from eating up large amounts of bidding room. The best justification for such an apparently paradoxical action is to preempt the opponents in a situation where they probably have game themselves and you have strength only in attack. As such I will cheerfully bid a splinter with values that do not quite guarantee game but do paint a "picture" of my hand and our limited options.

I don't disagree as long as the splinter is well defined but if you play this way responders hand is NOT a suitable splinter.

[pescetom]

ggwhiz, on 2018-September-01, 14:41, said:

I don't disagree as long as the splinter is well defined but if you play this way responders hand is NOT a suitable splinter.

I agree perfectly, I had not seen the responder's hand now posted.
With that hand I would use whatever mechanism is available to show game forcing fit at low level and initiate control-bids.

[nekthen]

silvr bull, on 2018-September-01, 12:32, said:

Thanks for the responses. Only 23 HCP and a quick claim for 13 tricks (HK stiff and onsides) is a testament to the power of abundant trumps and an excellent fit.

---

It also illustrates the power of controls

---

Who thinks this hand is worth a splinter?

[silvr bull]

nekthen, on 2018-September-02, 02:05, said:

It also illustrates the power of controls

---

Who thinks this hand is worth a splinter?

How about using a splinter as a dual range bid? The hand above would be a typical lower range where responder wants to A) bid game, and B) not raise slam interest, and C) reduce the opportunity for the opps to find a fit. After opener bids game, responder would pass with the low range splinter.

The high range would be much stronger, and responder would bid again even if opener gives no immediate encouragement. I agree with this exchange:

pescetom, on 2018-September-01, 14:35, said:

FWIW I am of the opposite opinion. There are many alternative ways of conveying a mild or strong slam try, none of which require or benefit from eating up large amounts of bidding room. The best justification for such an apparently paradoxical action is to preempt the opponents in a situation where they probably have game themselves and you have strength only in attack. As such I will cheerfully bid a splinter with values that do not quite guarantee game but do paint a "picture" of my hand and our limited options.

ggwhiz, on 2018-September-01, 14:41, said:

I don't disagree as long as the splinter is well defined but if you play this way responders hand is NOT a suitable splinter.

pescetom, on 2018-September-01, 15:04, said:

I agree perfectly, I had not seen the responder's hand now posted.
With that hand I would use whatever mechanism is available to show game forcing fit at low level and initiate control-bids.

The OP North hand (Kxx Axxxxx Axx x) would be in the middle between the two ranges. North might be better positioned by bidding a J2NT instead of a splinter, and taking control of the auction. Then North would primarily receive information instead of giving it. Imagine how North would proceed if South shows a D or a S stiff or void in response to J2NT.

[Pebbles28]

If partner is light for his splinter then he should only have high cards in side suits, so i imagine we have no losers outside trumps unless clubs break 5-2 and partner only has 4 trumps (or 5 missing the Ace). If partner has AD then he must have trump A or K and an outside K (or the second trump honour), in which case slam is all but cold (AH and a H will likely beat it). The only other hand I’m worried about is:

Xx
AKxx
KQTxxx
X

Or

Xx
Axxx(x)
AQJTx(x)
X

I don’t see an obvious way to cater for these hands except to bid kickback and then perhaps Q ask to determine trump length. Even on the bad hands above there is still some play, especially on a trump lead which is quite likely. Here partner will show 2 with the Q and you know slam is an excellent bet.

[The_Badger]

silvr bull, on 2018-September-01, 12:32, said:

Thanks for the responses. Only 23 HCP and a quick claim for 13 tricks (HK stiff and onsides) is a testament to the power of abundant trumps and an excellent fit.

---

This hand is, in my opinion, unsuitable for a splinter. Two Aces, a known 11 card trump fit and a singleton add up to 15+ distributional points. Using 2/1 - I assume you were playing that - I'd rather bid 2♦ or 2NT (Jacoby). There are plenty of hands where partner will have a doubleton ♦ which will be good for slam also.

In my original post I did indicate that splinters should have a more constructive feel, especially when using 2/1 as there are other ways to force to game without any problem. Personally I am not a great fan of four level splinters in response to a opening major suit bid as they take up too much bidding room: I'd rather using a variant of the Swiss Convention myself.

[pescetom]

The_Badger, on 2018-September-02, 06:14, said:

This hand is, in my opinion, unsuitable for a splinter. Two Aces, a known 11 card trump fit and a singleton add up to 15+ distributional points. Using 2/1 - I assume you were playing that - I'd rather bid 2♦ or 2NT (Jacoby).

Agree about the hand.
Using 2/1 I prefer to keep 2♦ as 5-card and put tricky hands through 2♣, so it would go something like this:

---