[mike777]

If partner bids 3s I am using blacky...end of story.
I love my hand.

Please note all of these example loser hands are 7.5-8.5 LTC openers..too sad.

The opp are silent..maybe partner has a 7LTC for once.

[the hog]

QUOTE (helene_t @ Sep 12 2005, 12:05 AM)
Is it obvious to everybody that 4♣ is a splinter here?


I think so, using the rule, "If a bid is forcing, then a jump in that suit is a splinter." (There are a few exceptions).


Never splinter in partner's suit.

[Flame]

If possible id show my club singlton either vs short trial or splinter whicever avaliable, if not id bid a natural 3D, bid 4H over partner 3H or continue cue bid on anything else.

[Free]

I agree that 4♣ isn't that obvious as a splinter. Splintering partner's suit is not one of the things I do...

[cf_John0]

Gerben42, on Sep 11 2005, 03:06 PM, said:

I need a ♠ cuebid from partner, no way around that.

IMO,Correct cue-bid sequence is the key to game or slam.

[Chamaco]

I like 2-way game tries (short suit and long suit).

Here I'd start with a short suit GT in clubs; if pard accepts, we have very good slam prospects.
I like this strategy much better than an immediate splinter 4C, since we have nothing in spades and it's difficult to checkback for a control there.

[han]

Since this was a pick-up partnership, I was definitely not going to splinter in partner's suit and get ourselves in trouble. I added the option to see if people would like it. The fact that so many people want to splinter with this hand (I would still prefer 3D) suggests that it might be reasonable to play it that way.

[inquiry]

Hannie, on Sep 12 2005, 09:23 AM, said:

Since this was a pick-up partnership, I was definitely not going to splinter in partner's suit and get ourselves in trouble. I added the option to see if people would like it. The fact that so many people want to splinter with this hand (I would still prefer 3D) suggests that it might be reasonable to play it that way.

Never splinter in partner's suit unless you have specific agreements about specific auctions where it is allowed.

3♦ should get you to whatever slams are possible. You can also use 2NT (not listed in your poll), if it is forcing. But 3♦ is best.

[Blofeld]

Sorry, I voted for splintering on the assumption that there was an agreement that it would be a splinter (and if there is, it's a bid that I'd like to make on this hand), whereas I wouldn't usually expect such an agreement.

[Fluffy]

4♣ if agreed.
3♦ otherwise, and 5♣ over the likelly 4♥ response, if partner bids 3♠ instead nothing will stop me to ask for aces, will try 7 if we have all.

[han]

OK, now that Fluffy says that he is going to try for the grand I am going to post partner's hand.

Partner had AJ10x xxxx x AKxx. Our auction was:

1C-1H
2H-3D
3S-4D
4H

My WC partner immediately took the blame for missing slam. I agree that this hand is huge and should definitely go on. However, I think that I was not without blame either, after partner's 3S I shouldn't let a mere sign-off stop me.

Anybody who disagrees with this analysis?

About playing in 7H, you would make it Fluffy. I made 7 in 4H, rarely a pleasant experience. We came in 2nd in the tourny, bidding slam would have been more than enough to win.

[Walddk]

Hannie, on Sep 12 2005, 09:48 PM, said:

OK, now that Fluffy says that he is going to try for the grand I am going to post partner's hand.

Partner had AJ10x xxxx x AKxx. Our auction was:

1C-1H
2H-3D
3S-4D
4H

My WC partner immediately took the blame for missing slam. I agree that this hand is huge and should definitely go on. However, I think that I was not without blame either, after partner's 3S I shouldn't let a mere sign-off stop me.

Anybody who disagrees with this analysis?

About playing in 7H, you would make it Fluffy. I made 7 in 4H, rarely a pleasant experience. We came in 2nd in the tourny, bidding slam would have been more than enough to win.

Signing off is quite an underbid with that hand now that partner confirmed that his 3♦ was a cue bid in advance. Opener could not have had better cards for his raise to 2♥.

Roland

[Winstonm]

Chamaco, on Sep 12 2005, 03:03 AM, said:

I like 2-way game tries (short suit and long suit).

Here I'd start with a short suit GT in clubs; if pard accepts, we have very good slam prospects.
I like this strategy much better than an immediate splinter 4C, since we have nothing in spades and it's difficult to checkback for a control there.

I am a fan of 2-way game tries also, but have found one of the problems is that the first bid is taken not for slam try but for game try and the responses are quite different.

A solution to this problem is to use: 1C-1H-2H-3H* as "serious" and a slam invitation. If this agreement had been in place, the auction could have gone:

1C-1H
2H-3H* Forcing - slam try
3S-4C
4D-4N
5H-6H.

Winston

[Chamaco]

Quote

I am a fan of 2-way game tries also, but have found one of the problems is that the first bid is taken not for slam try but for game try and the responses are quite different.

This "problem" is not so difficult to solve, e.g.

1. when one does accept the game try, he does not signoff, but bids the first cue above 3M;

2. when one refuses the GT, his pard can bypass 3M, either with the first 3-level cuebid or "serious" 3NT

Quote

A solution to this problem is to use: 1C-1H-2H-3H* as "serious" and a slam invitation.

The idea can work, but I do prefer to be able to know if pard's values are fitting with mine BEFORE starting cuebids.
Using the approach you suggest, I would have to start the cuebids without knowing more of pard's hand, and this I don't like.
My basic idea is that I want to know pard's shape or fitting values before cues.

I do like to be able to know more of pard's hand via short/long suit game tries, even when I have some slam prospects, and use the agreements I outlined above to tell pard that my hand was indeed a game force hand that was trying for slam.

[whereagles]

The key to the hand is the diamond singleton. Opener has no way to show it, unless you use some distributional gadget (which 99,99% don't).

[mike777]

whereagles, on Sep 13 2005, 03:11 AM, said:

The key to the hand is the diamond singleton. Opener has no way to show it, unless you use some distributional gadget (which 99,99% don't).

Why does not:
1c=1h
2h=3d
3s=more than enough? It gives me a huge hint that D are shortish at least?
I have only 2 spades in my hand, where are the spades?

BtW the huge vote for 4clubs splinter really shocks me. Am I the only guy here in shock and awe?

[inquiry]

Hannie, on Sep 12 2005, 03:48 PM, said:

Partner had AJ10x xxxx x AKxx. Our auction was:

1C-1H
2H-3D
3S-4D
4H

My WC partner immediately took the blame for missing slam. I agree that this hand is huge and should definitely go on. However, I think that I was not without blame either, after partner's 3S I shouldn't let a mere sign-off stop me.

Anybody who disagrees with this analysis?

About playing in 7H, you would make it Fluffy. I made 7 in 4H, rarely a pleasant experience. We came in 2nd in the tourny, bidding slam would have been more than enough to win.

I disagree with your bidding, I think 4♦ was wrong...... it might be vaguely possible to shoot the grand, but I doubt it...

What is 4D suppose to show? First, are we to assume 4D is last train? Even it is was, I think 4C is better option here. That is even it was last train, you missed the station when you failed to cue-bid 4♣. After partner shows life with 3S, it is time to cue-bid 4C not rebid 4D. A second advantage of 4C is it clears the way for partner bidding 4♦ as a return cue-bid or as last train.

Note, after 2♥ by partner, you are showing serious slam interest when you cue-bid 4♣ (or 4♦ for that matter). But over 4♦ partner can see your three small clubs, as you would have cue-bid with queen or second round control. After you bid 4♣ I can't imagine it is possible to miss slam, partner wiill cue-bidding the short ♦ (if it shows control), or bidding 4♦ (if it is last train).... I suspect when I found the heart queen missing, I would stop in six (after 4C by me and 4D by partner I use blackwood). But the grand might be "logical" if 4D by partner showed first or second round control on the following auction

1C-1H
2H-3D
3S-4C
4D-4NT
5H-5N
6C-7H
Pass

Assume 4D = first or second round control, not last train
5H = two keys, no heart queen
5NT = specific king ask
6C = king of club
7H = Partner has SPADE ACE, CLUB AK. If you play 14-16 NT, you now know parnters diamond control was likely singleton diamond, and if not, you have ♦ finessee in reserve.

[whereagles]

Mike777: You can reason like that, especially if opps don't like passing. But I would be weary of jumping into that sort of conclusion with a slam at stake.

[Fluffy]

whereagles, on Sep 13 2005, 08:11 AM, said:

The key to the hand is the diamond singleton. Opener has no way to show it, unless you use some distributional gadget (which 99,99% don't).

I play 2NT forcing asking for features, but then, I wouldn't had used it on this board.

[hrothgar]

inquiry, on Sep 13 2005, 03:47 PM, said:

I disagree with your bidding, I think 4♦ was wrong...... it might be vaguely possible to shoot the grand, but I doubt it...

What is 4D suppose to show? First, are we to assume 4D is last train? Even it is was, I think 4C is better option here.

Ben has touched on what I consider to be a very interesting question:

Assume that partner opens 1♣ playing a "standard" system and the auction develops something like 1♣ - 1M - 2M. Does it make sense to treat partner's Clubs as a "real" suit?

Earlier, a number of people were suggesting a splinter rebid in Clubs:
1♣ - 1H - 2H - 4♣ or some such.

Currently, Ben is suggesting cue bidding shortage opposite partner's "suit".

A number of people have criticized these bids, suggesting that its critical to be able to show support for partner's suit...

Here's the rub: Given that the 1♣ opening could easily be based on a holding like Qxx or xxxx, does it make sense to consider this as a suit or not?