[Free]

You hold:

Scoring: IMP

---

Your partner opens 1♥ (normal opening)

What would you do if your only options were to splinter or to bid a natural 2/1?

[pclayton]

2 clubs. I'll go to my grave defending this one.

[RichMor]

2♣

A splinter should show fairly even distribution of honors among the side suits. With this hand, Qxx in Clubs is great and Qxx in Spades is not.

[ArtK78]

This hand is potentially HUGE. If partner has very good hearts for his opening bid, a small is almost certain and a grand is possible.

However, if you splinter and partner, with some diamond cards, signs off, you will be faced with a dilemma whether to bid again or not. He could hold:

xxx
AKxxx
AQJ
Qx

A pretty good slam, but with AQJ of diamonds and five quick losers in the black suits partner is unlikely to do anything other than 4♥ over the splinter. Or he could have a totally unsuitable hand, like:

Kxx
QJTxxx
KQJ
x

and even 5♥ would fail.

I think you will do better in most cases by bidding 2♣ over 1♥ and cue-bidding after setting hearts as trump.

[SlickRicky]

Hi,

I think that avoiding a bad grand opposite xxx clubs and getting partner to correctly evaluate the CQ and know about a source of tricks are both important features to this hand, so I will start with 2C.

Ricky

[Gerben42]

I will bid a splinter. I have values in both side suits.

[jdonn]

I feel 2♣ is better, although I honestly don't feel very strongly either way.

[P_Marlowe]

4D.

You have a bid that showes the hand, make it.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

ArtK78, on Sep 26 2008, 02:51 PM, said:

<snip>
However, if you splinter and partner, with some diamond cards, signs off, you will be faced with a dilemma whether to bid again or not.
<snip>

No, I pass.

you may think the hand to strong, go ahead
bid 2C.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Flameous]

Oh I so love fit jumps. But I'll take the splinter option here.

[ewj]

The reason I'm not bidding 2NT here is a combination of my good club suit (but want to find out about 3rd round control) and the fact that my 4 trumps are so poor.
I'm certainly not going to splinter with such poor trumps and controls in every suit.

[655321]

Splinter for me.

I don't feel that strongly about it, but I choose the splinter because it describes everything about the hand, except that we have a possible source of tricks in the club suit. And our clubs are not that great. If we have to ruff out the suit, that leaves only 4(3?) club tricks, Qx is not enough to make the clubs solid.

The weak trumps are still weak whether we splinter or bid 2♣.

Anyway, 2♣ is of course a reasonable bid too.

ArtK78, on Sep 26 2008, 02:51 PM, said:

However, if you splinter and partner, with some diamond cards, signs off, you will be faced with a dilemma whether to bid again or not.

No, there is no dilemma. You have splintered so that partner knows your exact range and that you have a singleton diamond. If partner signs off, even thinking about moving is a misbid.

[peachy]

I like 2C. Next will support hearts and expect we look for slam. Partner knows to upgrade club Q if he has it and knows we will have a suit for side tricks. Splinter isn't really "wrong" but I like to splinter when I know what I will do after partner signs off after I have splintered. Here, I really don't know if I should try once more or Pass.

[han]

I tend to splinter with such hands. Move the ace of spades to the heart suit (Jxx Axxx x AKxxx) and I would bid 2C.

[cherdano]

You really play 11-14 hcp splinter? Standard splinters are more like 10-12, I think this hand is slightly too strong for that (despite the weak trumps).

[dake50]

IMMEDIATE splinter no. But 2C with a delayed splinter fits my message on this hand.

[Walddk]

dake50, on Sep 27 2008, 06:13 AM, said:

IMMEDIATE splinter no. But 2C with a delayed splinter fits my message on this hand.

How will you be able to bid a delayed splinter for hearts after

1♥ - 2♣
2N

If you bid 4♦ now, your partner will not take it as a splinter for hearts; for clubs rather. At least I would. With this said, I wouldn't splinter over 1♥ either. This hand is too strong as I play it. 9-11 hcp or 17+ is what a splinter shows in my book.

In this context I recommend that you don't bid 4♦ with a singleton. 3♠ (unspecified singleton) is better in my opinion. Then you could use a direct 4♦ to show a void within the same point range, or as Steve Robinson likes it: one is a limited splinter, singleton or void, the other one a very strong hand.

Roland

[mike777]

i think splinter is ok...wish we played 2s as splinter..some..(stiff) over 1h.

[Free]

cherdano, on Sep 27 2008, 05:08 AM, said:

You really play 11-14 hcp splinter? Standard splinters are more like 10-12, I think this hand is slightly too strong for that (despite the weak trumps).

This is the first time I heard anyone say that splinters are standard 10-12

Question for the ones that splinter: what do you do when partner responds 4♥? Is the auction over or not?

[SlickRicky]

Walddk, on Sep 27 2008, 01:43 AM, said:

How will you be able to bid a delayed splinter for hearts after

1♥ - 2♣
2N

If you bid 4♦ now, your partner will not take it as a splinter for hearts; for clubs rather.

Hi Roland,

I disagree, I think it is common (at least in my area) to play this as a splinter for hearts. Of course partner will generally take you for 3 hearts rather than four since you made a delayed splinter, so you can't have everything. I had even thought this was "expert standard" but I guess not.

I also think it is superior from a theoretical standpoint to play this as a splinter for hearts rather than clubs; it will be rare to have short diamonds and a club 1 suiter given that you have at most 2 hearts. Shapes like 3217 are possible but rare compared to 4315, 3316, some 3415s, etc. It also seems more likely to be useful information that you have a stiff diamond when you are the short trump hand, and you are more likely to want to be the captain of the auction when you have 7+ clubs. This is not to say that a splinter for clubs would be useless, I just think it would be less useful and less frequent.

Ricky