[CSGibson]

We had the following auction playing 2/1 game forcing:

---

---

Despite being an experienced partnership, we had never discussed this auction. Agreements are that 2/1 is always game forcing, even with a suit rebid; no strong jump shifts; and we do not use an immediate Jacoby 2N or splinter if the most important feature of our hand is a source of tricks. 2N indicates a balanced hand with the outside suits stopped; 2♠ would be our default rebid.

What do you think 4♦ should mean? Is it obvious?

[aguahombre]

Dunno what it "should mean", but I do know what it does mean to us; and it is discussed.

Because (for good or bad), our 2NT rebid is very specific as to shape we can do this:

Opener has shown exactly 5-2-3-3 shape and either 11-14 or 18-19.

Thus 4D sets trump and is minorwood for diamonds. There are six keys because opener has 2 hearts. If responder wants to change the final strain to hearts or NT at the slam level, that is her business.

[JLOGIC]

Splinter for spades (only promising/implying 3 trumps), I probably only think this is obvious because I know what it means for almost every expert partnership who has discussed it. Kind of like how I would assume 1S-1N-4C was an auto splinter without discussion.

[phil_20686]

AM amazed by the poll. I thought this was 3 card spades decent (but not nec solid) heart suit and diamond shortage for everyone. I thought the only question would be whether it promises or denies a club control.

[neilkaz]

♠ Splinter for me and not a raunchy minimum since space is limited.

[aguahombre]

neilkaz, on 2011-August-25, 11:24, said:

♠ Splinter for me and not a raunchy minimum since space is limited.

There is disagreement about that. Some feel that bids which take up a lot of space should be quite narrowly defined and limited in strength.

Just in case someone wants to jump on this, I was referring to splinters and other jumps which make partner the Captain, not jump bids which ask questions and retain Captaincy.

This post has been edited by aguahombre: 2011-August-25, 11:44

[gnasher]

My first thought was that it was obviously an autosplinter for hearts.

[whereagles]

To me undiscussed bids are natural, so this is like a 6-5 on the reds.

[JLOGIC]

gnasher, on 2011-August-25, 11:43, said:

My first thought was that it was obviously an autosplinter for hearts.

Which is more likely, that you have 3 spades and shortness in a minor (or 4 and a hand you didn't want to splinter or bid 2N with immed), or that you have long hearts and not 3 spades and shortness in a minor (and no second suit that you want to bid)? Sure you could be 7321 or whatever, but with 6-4 you would often bid your 2nd suit and with 3 spades you'd usually want to bid spades.

On top of that it is imo less likely to be important for you to show your shortness when you have the 1 suited heart hand. Yes, it is important in either case, but I think when you have the ruffing value it will be more important (I suppose this is debatable).

[jmcw]

I see 2 realistic possibilities.
Splinter with 3 card ♠ support.
Splinter agreeing ♥.
Does it matter much to opener which it is? and should it show/promise a ♣ control? Is it a slam try?

IMO North has taken control of the auction and is making a slam try. To me this means that ♣ should be covered (a control). South has to guess what partner's bid means, with a minimum or wasted values in ♦ he can sign off 4♥, with a good hand bid something else.

[JLOGIC]

Why can north not have AKx AKJxx x xxxx or something. Seems like a perfect hand to splinter. Having a club control is really not that important at this point of the auction, a slam try with hearts, spades, and short diamonds is already specific enough. It gives partner the information he needs to intelligently decide if you're in the slam zone or not. If he wants to check on a club control that can come later, but first priorities are to establish fits (check) and show relevant features (short diamonds, hearts, check), and general values (slam try!). Seems perfect. If partner feels you might have a slam because he fits well, it is extremely unlikely you will ever be off a club control, and even if you are you can still stop.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

CSGibson, on 2011-August-25, 09:15, said:

We had the following auction playing 2/1 game forcing:

---

If partner had 3 card ♠ support, he could make a clear-cut 3♠ raise ( over 2NT ) .

If partner had 4 card ♠ support, he could immediately bid Jac2NT or make an immediate splinter raise depending on whether he "wanted informatiom" or "wanted to give" information... and forget about showing his 5+card ♥ suit..... ( I knoww, I know ... some like to muddy up the waters by showing a "source of tricks" first )

That leaves an "auto-splinter" for his good, long suit: ♥ .

Analogous situations that I KNOW are auto-splinters are the following where Opener has rebid 1NT:
1C/1D - 1H
1NT - 4C/4D/3S all would be auto- or self-splinters for ♥ as trump.

Edit: I seem to recall a similar thread recently involving a 2NT rebid by Opener after a 2/1 Response .... something like:
1H - 2D
2NT - 4C = auto-splinter ? ( I've forgotten the concensus ) .

This post has been edited by TWO4BRIDGE: 2011-August-25, 13:43

[phil_20686]

JLOGIC, on 2011-August-25, 12:33, said:

Why can north not have AKx AKJxx x xxxx or something. Seems like a perfect hand to splinter. Having a club control is really not that important at this point of the auction, a slam try with hearts, spades, and short diamonds is already specific enough. It gives partner the information he needs to intelligently decide if you're in the slam zone or not. If he wants to check on a club control that can come later, but first priorities are to establish fits (check) and show relevant features (short diamonds, hearts, check), and general values (slam try!). Seems perfect. If partner feels you might have a slam because he fits well, it is extremely unlikely you will ever be off a club control, and even if you are you can still stop.

It feels like if these splinters are fairly tightly defined, knowledge of the club position could be fairly crucial to 5 level safety. Also, it is hard to imagine that the singleton really adds to your playing strength, expecially when your spades are good. I also seem to have a variety of cuebidding sequences starting with 3S available. So it makes sense to define it tightly. I would assume that it shows decent spades good hearts and no club control I think, If I have good hearts, good spades a club control and a singleton diamond I have a slam drive for sure anyway. Seems like an interesting discussion anyways.

[phil_20686]

[quote name='TWO4BRIDGE' timestamp='1314300443' post='570714']
If partner had 3 card ♠ support, he could make a clear-cut 3♠ raise.

If partner had 4 card ♠ support, he could make Jac2NT or immediate splinter raise depending on whether he "wanted informatiom" or "wanted to give" information... and forget about showing his 5+card ♥ suit.

That leaves an "auto-splinter" for his good, long suit: ♥ .
[\quote]

That doesnt make sense. With long hearts he can rebid 3H, and partner will cue, as 3H should be a mild slam try on this auction already. HCP opposite a shortage aren't even definitely wasted when one hand has a long suit anyway. Something like KJx could provide a pitch for a different loser anyway. With more balanced hands you normally need a lot more than one pitch.

[gwnn]

If partner had 3 card ♠ support, he could make a clear-cut 3♠ raise ( over 2NT ) .

If partner had 4 card ♠ support, he could immediately bid Jac2NT or make an immediate splinter raise depending on whether he "wanted informatiom" or "wanted to give" information... and forget about showing his 5+card ♥ suit..... ( I knoww, I know ... some like to muddy up the waters by showing a "source of tricks" first )

If partner had 4 diamonds, he could make a 3♦ rebid here.

If partner had a good hand with long hearts, he could have bid 3♥ here, or perhaps on the first round.

Therefore I conclude that partner has gone insane, I will call the director, or perhaps an ambulance.

Spoiler

This post is not 100% serious. I just wanted to illustrate the fact that just because every hand is possibly covered by other, cheaper calls, you can still bid 4♦. I personally like splinter for spades but perhaps autosplinter for hearts is also possible.

[JLOGIC]

Phil, you could argue the same thing about something like 1S p 4D also regarding certain controls (even more important now!). You have to find some balance between being managably/playably constrained, and having the bid ever come up. Think about hands that might splinter here that have no club control (remember they are pretty good hands since they're trying for slam opposite a likely weak NT, and they have short diamonds). Obv those hands are stacked in the majors, eg my example hand of AKx AKJxx x xxxx. If partner is cooperating with a slam try and we have that, how could he have no club control? Sure you could make it weaker and give it the QJ of clubs but the main point is if your hand is that loaded in the majors and partner wants to go past the 4 level, it is so unlikely you're off a club control. Like, probably less likely than 1N 4N 6N getting to slam with 32 HCP off 2 aces, and that's pretty rare. Even if you do get to the 5 level it might be ok.

I think people worry in general too much about specific controls and not enough about quantitative evaluation, the main purpose of these bids is to figure out if you have enough/fit well enough to go to slam to begin with. Only then should we worry about controls imo, and in hands where we have short diamonds and still think we have enough for slam I just find it really unlikely we will be screwed by a club control.

It would be a shame to not be able to splinter with a good hand with 3(5/6)x(3/4) because we have no club control, and never be able to work out what truly matters, our level of diamond wastage, below the 5 level. That will cause far more bad results than a missing club control when we have everything else, imo.

[whereagles]

guys, while I agree the bid is best used as either an auto splinter or spade splinter, I wouldn't even dream to make the bid unless I was bloody sure what pard would make of it.

In absence of an agreement I really think the meta-rule "no agreement = natural" works wonders

[jdeegan]

JLOGIC, on 2011-August-25, 10:53, said:

Splinter for spades (only promising/implying 3 trumps), I probably only think this is obvious because I know what it means for almost every expert partnership who has discussed it. Kind of like how I would assume 1S-1N-4C was an auto splinter without discussion.

You said exactly what I was going to say, even down to the 3 card (to an honor??) ♠ support. To me autosplinters have to be really obvious like you say. I might even need the ♥ king or queen, else why bring it into the discussion? Playing 2/1 you would just go slow with an all red hand.

[phil_20686]

JLOGIC, on 2011-August-25, 14:36, said:

Phil, you could argue the same thing about something like 1S p 4D also regarding certain controls (even more important now!). You have to find some balance between being managably/playably constrained, and having the bid ever come up. Think about hands that might splinter here that have no club control (remember they are pretty good hands since they're trying for slam opposite a likely weak NT, and they have short diamonds). Obv those hands are stacked in the majors, eg my example hand of AKx AKJxx x xxxx. If partner is cooperating with a slam try and we have that, how could he have no club control? Sure you could make it weaker and give it the QJ of clubs but the main point is if your hand is that loaded in the majors and partner wants to go past the 4 level, it is so unlikely you're off a club control. Like, probably less likely than 1N 4N 6N getting to slam with 32 HCP off 2 aces, and that's pretty rare. Even if you do get to the 5 level it might be ok.

Doesnt everyone play this 2N rebid as 18-19 balanced, and rebid 2!s on this auction with a wk nt? I thought that was pretty routine expert practice pretty much everywhere. Obvio this is pretty key to this discussion.

[cherdano]

phil_20686, on 2011-August-25, 17:50, said:

Doesnt everyone play this 2N rebid as 18-19 balanced, and rebid 2!s on this auction with a wk nt? I thought that was pretty routine expert practice pretty much everywhere. Obvio this is pretty key to this discussion.

I am sure someone from Europe would post that it obviously shows 15-17
In a style where you always open 1NT when in range with a 5-card major, I thought it's normal that 2NT in the auction above is 2-way, either 12-14 or 18-19; the latter will make another move towards slam later.