[MrAce]

---

2/1 IMP pairs

[mcphee]

Poor S wanted to bid again I suspect but just can't. You can obviously have a play for 12 or 13 tricks on days your side has the all important A of clubs even if he has 4 little trumps. Its a difficult position for S, I see no blame.

[The_Badger]

Personally, I don't understand East's 2♣ or South's 4♦. That South hand is massive in support of ♠s. At equal vulnerability I take on board that it's less likely that the opponents will sacrifice (though it works well here). Did South expect anything other than 4♠ from North?

Though to be honest, it's going to take an imaginative bidding sequence to reach slam. Splintering with a South hand that has a distributional total point count in the region of 22 with top trumps is unimaginative in my opinion.

[sfi]

I'm not crazy about splinters when I have a long suit that might be a source of tricks if partner has a bit of help. If possible I would bid 4C, which should get something besides a sign-off from partner. 4H last train would be ideal, and the lack of wasted diamond values may be enough for South to push for the slam.

[wank]

north has far too much for 4s. all the blame to him.

2 extra trumps a.k.a. tricks and 2 top honours in partner's main suit. oh dear

[masse24]

I like a 4♥ Last Train, if available. If not, sitting North, I would think a bit longer and probably still make a move.

North owns this one.

[blackshoe]

Rub of the green, IMO.

[ggwhiz]

The 4♦ bid, self pre-empting staring at those trumps plus the ♥A PLUS the diamond void is very ill considered. Is north really going to cue 5♣ over that? (with just about anything that makes 6 let alone 7)

A simple 2♦ cue to set spades and a further cue (of hearts probably) would do the job against anything but a fast 5♦ bid by them.

[gszes]

The 4d bid is spot on here since any (non dia values) hands responder might have put us in the slam zone. Wank was spot on as well noting that N instead of counting HCP should trust their p to know what they are doing and give a simple 5c raise. Followed by 5d 5s 6c (if your partnership cannot cue the club Q here u are missing out on much) 7s shows how easy this game can get sometimes. FWIW i would give the simple 5c bid with only 4 spades in hand much less 6 of them:)

[nige1]

 MrAce, on 2017-June-09, 04:06, said:

2/1 IMP pairs

---

Agree with Blackshoe, that it's hard. IMO

• South 20%. Naturally, South is worried about his ♥ losers. On reflection, however, I go along with ggwizz's argument that South has a 3-4 loser hand with no trump loser. Thus, perhaps, he is too good for a 4♦ splinter. Hence, maybe, South should take it more slowly. For slam purposes, North's ♣ holding is likely to be crucial. Slam is reasonable opposite a fitting 2-count e.g. ♠ x x x x x x ♥ x ♦ x x x x ♣ Q x
• North 30%. North lacks ♠ tops but South is likely to have good trumps when he shows 4+ card support for a 6-card suit. With such good ♣s, North might bid 4♥ (Last-train). Perhaps North worries that South might have a more typical splinter. e.g. ♠ K J x x ♥ A K Q x ♦ x ♣ K J x x.

[Cyberyeti]

Blame S, 4♦ is clearcut voidwood for me, 3♦ would be a splinter, xxxxx, xxx, xxx, Ax is a decent slam

[cherdano]

 wank, on 2017-June-09, 07:17, said:

north has far too much for 4s. all the blame to him.

2 extra trumps a.k.a. tricks and 2 top honours in partner's main suit. oh dear

Agree 1000%. AKxx Axx x Kjxxx.

[Winstonm]

 ggwhiz, on 2017-June-09, 12:36, said:

The 4♦ bid, self pre-empting staring at those trumps plus the ♥A PLUS the diamond void is very ill considered. Is north really going to cue 5♣ over that? (with just about anything that makes 6 let alone 7)

A simple 2♦ cue to set spades and a further cue (of hearts probably) would do the job against anything but a fast 5♦ bid by them.

Agree, especially when holding a potential trick source in clubs.

[Winstonm]

 cherdano, on 2017-June-09, 13:28, said:

Agree 1000%. AKxx Axx x Kjxxx.

I see you thinking but where do you draw the line on the splinter bid? AQxx, AKx, x, Kxxxx?

[MrAce]

 Cyberyeti, on 2017-June-09, 13:13, said:

Blame S, 4♦ is clearcut voidwood for me, 3♦ would be a splinter, xxxxx, xxx, xxx, Ax is a decent slam

Playing 3♦ splinter and 4♦ exclusion is like purchasing an F-16 for a fist fight in case you may need it one day! . You will not need it when 4 people are bidding and particularly when one of them cued? Come on Cyber, you know better than that!

 Winstonm, on 2017-June-09, 15:25, said:

I see you thinking but where do you draw the line on the splinter bid? AQxx, AKx, x, Kxxxx?

This is not a splinter hand if you have only one splinter available.(perhaps borderline) If you play both 3 and 4 ♦ as different range splinters then you know pd can not hold this hand for his 4♦.

I think Wank and Arend hit the nail on this one, but I may as well be biased because I was the one who bid 4♦. It is easy when seeing pd has 5th and 6th ♠. It is totally another story when he holds only 4 card ♠ and short clubs and I can easily construct hands where making 4♠ either needs a perfect tempo or has no play at all. 5 level can be nightmare and this is assuming you can stop at 5 level after 1 more move.

Txxx QJx Qxxx xx Do not expect more than this (value wise) when one of them bids and other one cues)

Thanks to all for the replies. I was expecting more people to blame me (South) than the replies here but I am sort of relieved by the replies

[The_Badger]

I stand corrected. However, there are bidding sequences that show voids, and bidding sequences that show singletons. As quite a few commentators have said, there are plenty of South hands where slam would be a no-go.

Blaming North entirely is (to me) unfair. If you're going to use splinters, use splinters to show a singleton specifically (which come up more times statistically than a void as everybody knows).

The suggestion I was going to write but thought better of it is that South bids 2♦ followed by 4♦ to show this rockcrusher with a void. The reason I didn't is that East/West's bidding is at best lacklustre, and at worse amateurish.

In a normal competitive auction, if South bids 2♦ will he be allowed to bid 4♦ if East/West bid properly? We shall never know.

[MrAce]

 The_Badger, on 2017-June-10, 00:14, said:

The suggestion I was going to write but thought better of it is that South bids 2♦ followed by 4♦ to show this rockcrusher with a void. The reason I didn't is that East/West's bidding is at best lacklustre, and at worse amateurish.

I have sympathy to starting 2♦ suhhestion but I do not see south hand as "rockcrusher" as you see. What makes NS hands so strong is

• 5th and 6th spade
• AQ♣ support
• ♦Void

For example

Axxx
AKx
--
Kxxxxx

is still a very decent slam. I like the idea of 3♦ showing single and 4♦ void BUT NOT void wood.

[nige1]

 MrAce, on 2017-June-10, 02:32, said:

I like the idea of 3♦ showing single and 4♦ void BUT NOT void wood.

We play mini-splinters, both in competition, and when opponents are silent. For us, 3♦ shows a raise to at least the 3-level, with a ♦ shortage (singleton or a void). Thus, in the 1st instance, the mini-splinter acts as a game-try but, later, might turn out to have been a slam try. . The mini-splinter opens up space for exploration. For.example, 3N by either of us is a serious slam try. If strong enough, we can repeat the cue-bid with 4♦, to show a void, rather than a singleon. This frees up a direct 4♦, which you might define as a void-spinter with a specific range. I confess that we use it as voidwood

[MrAce]

Out of curiosity I arranged a poll in BW for the S hand.

http://bridgewinners...m-2-kbpfg6g94x/