|
Splinters
Generally speaking, Splinters are shortness-showing jumps with a fit for Partner. A Splinter asks the basic question "Is your hand improved by knowing about this short suit? If so, perhaps we have slam". Good holdings opposite a Splinter are Axx and xxx, where there is no wastage of high cards. Conversely, holdings such as KQJx and AKQx are poor indeed opposite a Splinter, all those high cards would be better employed in the other suits.
7th July, 2010 Both Vul
Let’s assume that N-S are playing a 2/1 style, in which case what is your next bid as North? - Bid 4♥? Not a good idea, that would show a minimum hand and North is far from that. - 4NT? No, this hand is not that good! - A 4♦ Splinter? This shows Diamond shortness and Heart support and is certainly a better effort than bidding 4♥ directly. Not ideal, though, we’d say that the hand is just a little bit strong for the splinter, and North won’t be completely comfortable passing if South now bids 4♥. - Raise to 3♥? That seems best, maybe South can make a constructive move which will help the partnership get to slam.
1st September, 2010 N-S Vul
Let’s look at South’s rebid (and let’s assume that N-S are playing a 2/1 style). What would be your choice? You could simply raise to 3♦, but surely a more descriptive bid is 3♠, showing Diamond support and shortness in Spades. Splinters usually work best when we have a minimum hand, the reason being that there is little point in jumping the bidding to ask “Do you like your hand opposite my shortness?”, and then when Partner says “No!”, bidding on anyway because we still like our hand. That being so, 3♠ is the perfect splinter, after which South will be happy to leave the rest of the auction in Partner’s capable hands.
6th October, 2010 E-W Vul
After North’s 1♥ opening, South has enough to go to game, the question is how? - 4♥? Not recommended, this bid is more useful as a preempt, showing a 5th heart and a weaker hand. - 2NT? This is generally played as a game-forcing Heart raise, the so-called Jacoby 2NT. The bid asks Opener to describe her hand further, which is something of a waste of time when South has a perfectly good descriptive bid of her own that she can make. - 3♠? Yes, that’s what we are talking about! 3♠ is a splinter (not a Spade preempt), and South has a most suitable hand for the bid. Not only does she have the required 4-card support and Spade shortness, she also has a hand without extras. That being the case, she can happily pass if Partner’s next bid is 4♥. What we avoid is splintering with extras, then hearing Partner say “My hand is not improved by your splinter”, then wondering if we should bid on anyway.
1st December, 2010 E-W Vul
North’s 4♦ was a splinter showing game-values, a Spade fit and Diamond shortness. What would a Double by East mean here? Generally speaking, Doubles of artificial bids are lead-directing, but is there really any point in doubling for the lead of a suit that Dummy is short in? The answer is “No!” and many partnerships use the Double to request the lead of one of the other two side-suits. Which one? Take your pick, one common method is that the Double requests the lead of the suit below the splinter (and if North had splintered in Clubs then the suit below would be Hearts in this auction). Does that mean that, on this hand, East should double 4♦ for a Club lead? We are not sure that is a great idea, East has something in both side-suits, so it might be better to pass and trust Partner’s good judgment.
7th October, 2009 None Vul
Let’s assume that East’s 2♥ was in the “Two over One” style, which is to say that it is game-forcing. After the 2♥ bid, West immediately is thinking about slam, of course, what is his best way of proceeding? - 4♦ Splinter? We don’t like this choice at all! 4♦ asks the question “How do you like your hand opposite Diamond shortness?”, but even if East were to bid 4♥ now, saying “That shortness does not improve my hand”, West would be reluctant to pass as his hand is so good. There is not much point in asking the question if you plan disregard the answer! - Roman Key Card? You’ll probably use this eventually, but there’s no great urgency to use it immediately. - Raise to 3♥? Yes, as this is being played here as forcing it looks best to us. Now Partner has a chance to express an opinion about his hand. We can always use Roman Key Card later. As it happens, East likes his hand enough to cue-bid 4♦, then Roman Key Card uncovers two Key Cards and the Queen of trumps. 5NT was the King Ask, 6♣ showed the ♣K (playing Specific Kings), and West took a shot at 7♥. From West’s point of view, 7♥ is not guaranteed, as it is conceivable that East has three small Spades and three Clubs, in which case there will be an inescapable Spade loser. But that seems like a long shot and in all other cases 7♥ will be a fine contract. As it happens, it’s 13 easy tricks.
1st October, 2008
Board 26 Board 29 ♠ AQT3 ♠ AQ82 ♥ Q75 ♥ AJ7 ♦ AKQ73 ♦ AKQ74 ♣5 ♣ 6
East South West North South West North East 1♦ Pass 1♠ Pass Pass Pass ?? 1♦ Pass 1♠ Pass ?? Two remarkably similar hands! In both cases, we have enough for game, and there are no fewer than 4 ways of proceeding: - Raise to 4♠: This bid is normally reserved for balanced 18-19 hands, so not really appropriate in this case. - Fake Reverse to 2♥: The plan here would be to raise to 4♠ later, typically showing 4=4=4=1 or 4=3=5=1. Why not splinter with such a hand? The normal style is for the reverse then the raise to game to show a stronger hand. Well, this hand is not that good, so no fake reverse this time. - Jump to 4♦: This is generally played as showing a good 6-card suit (some would say solid), 4-card Spade support and game values. - 4♣ Splinter: Shortness-showing with game-going Spade support. According to the above descriptions, on Board 26, East has a 4♣ splinter. And on Board 29? We would say that this time Opener is worth a fake reverse followed by a raise to 4♠.
3rd September, 2008 None Vul
South’s 4♣ was a Splinter, showing game values, shortness in Clubs, and Spade support. What would a Double mean here? It’s not particularly helpful to play this as lead-directing for Clubs, and a more useful treatment is to play it as lead-directing for a different suit. Conventionally, the other suit is usually defined as “the suit below the splinter suit”. What’s lower than Clubs? With Spades agreed, it’s Hearts. Should West double here for a Heart lead? Yes, it would be nice if the defense started A♥ and ruff a Heart, don’t you think? As it happens, that’s the only defense to hold Declarer to 10 tricks. Let’s not forget the negative inference if West chooses not to double 4♣, namely that West prefers a Diamond or else has no preference.
20th December, 2006 Board 16 E-W Vul
This hand is going to game (at least) in Spades, but by what route? The three choices are: - 2NT: Most partnerships play some variety of the Jacoby 2NT, a bid which shows Spade support (usually at least 4) and game-going values. - 4♥: This double-jump would be a Splinter bid for most players, showing shortness in the bid suit and support for Partner’s Spades. - 2♣: Showing the strong side-suit before raising Spades.
Of those three bids, we especially dislike the Splinter, it wastes so much bidding space without addressing two important features of the hand, namely the very strong Clubs and the two fast Diamond losers. This would be much more suitable as a Splinter: ♠ KT97 ♥ 7 ♦ A85 ♣ A9852 Here we don’t have a source of tricks in a side-suit, nor do we have 2 fast losers in a side-suit. Instead, the hand is characterized by good controls and no concentration of values, just what a Splinter should be.
9th August, 2006 Board 22 E-W Vul
How do you play 3♠ by North in this situation? Is it preemptive? Or a Splinter? Either’s fine, our own preference is for 3♠ to be a Splinter. If that is your partnership's agreement, then look no further than a 3♠ bid here ... otherwise, you'll have to make a forcing Diamond raise of some sort ... and, if you don't have one available, then you'll have to fudge things with a 2♣ bid.
28th March, 2007 Board 17 None Vul
Here’s another Splinter situation. Or is it? Do you play that Splinters are on over a Takeout Double? Of course, Splinter bids are primarily a slam tool, and the chances of slam go down when the opponents make a Double, but even so we like to play Splinters in this situation. But that’s not a universally held view, so it’s worth making sure that you and your Partner are on the same wavelength here.
And if a Splinter bid is not available in your methods. Some partnerships play that 2NT is “Jordan”, showing 4-card support and at least a limit raise in Opener’s major, so that would be a good choice. And if that is not available either, then we would redouble and go to game later. One thing we would not do is to bid 4♥ directly, that shows a weak hand, perhaps 5 Hearts and not much else.
30th August, 2006 Board 23 Both Vul
If South were not a passed hand, and if East had not chimed in with a 1♠ overcall, then 4♣ here would clearly be a Splinter bid. As it is, we have two questions: - Are Splinters on after their overcall? This is something to agree with your Partner as different people play this different ways … for what it’s worth, we believe that the majority preference is for Splinters still to be on (and also after their Take-out Double) - Are Splinters still on by a passed hand? Again, we would say “Yes”, though it probably won’t come up very often in real life.
Anyway, if your partnership answers “Yes” to both these questions, we’d say that the South hand is worth a 4♣ Splinter bid. True, Partner may have opened light in 3rd seat, but even with this in mind we are no doubt planning to bid up to 4♥ eventually … if that is the case, we might as well get there quickly and descriptively.
If the 4♣ Splinter is not an option in your methods, then a simple 2♠ cue-bid will suffice to tell Partner you have an unusually good hand (for a passed hand) in support of Hearts.
12th July, 2006 Board 15 N-S Vul
Here are the options: (a) 4♠ gets E-W to where they probably belong, and takes bidding space away from South. The trouble is that this is a preemptive bid, and Partner might not expect so much defense from us … if South were to bid 5♦ now, and Partner held a slightly different hand to his actual one (say one less Diamond, one more Spade), he might well guess wrong and try a white against red sacrifice. For this reason, we don’t much care for the 4♠ bid; (b) On the previous hand, West was able to make a jump-cue in the opponent’s suit to show shortness and game values. So, how about 3♦ here? No, opposite an overcall the jump-cue is generally used to show a mixed raise, which is to say something less than a limit raise, 4-card support. Take away a Queen, a Jack, and one of those trumps, and East would have been a fine 3♦ bid! (c) The 2♦ cue-bid would show a limit raise (or better), and would be a reasonable choice … (d) … but our own personal favorite is a Splinter of 4♦, which takes bidding space away from the opponents. And, it is also descriptive, giving Partner the best chance of guessing right if South takes another call.
5th July, 2006 Board 19 E-W Vul
After 1♥, South has the values for game, and could just bid 4♥ directly. But, a more descriptive bid is available … yes, 3♦! This is a jump reverse, and a good treatment for the bid is to play it as showing a (Heart) fit and shortness. Although Splinters are usually thought of as a slam bidding tool, we suggest that the Jump Reverse be played as not game-forcing. So, South would have made the same rebid, holding about a King less. Using this treatment, the Jump Reverse can help us improve our game bidding, too. Consider these two hands: ♠ Q64 ♠ 972 ♥ AJ94 ♥ QT62 ♦ 9 ♦ KQ87 ♣ AQJ74 ♣ K2 Opener has the values (after 1♣ 1♥) for a 3♥ rebid, after which Responder would no doubt guess to bid the (poor) game. But, if the partnership has a Jump Reverse available, Responder will be warned off game by that unsuitable Diamond holding. Here's another example: ♠ Q64 ♠ K72 ♥ AJ94 ♥ QT65 ♦ 9 ♦ 873 ♣ AQJ74 ♣ K32 Now, in the same situation as before, Responder can take a shot at game ... he has a lesser hand than before, but it's a more suitable one opposite Diamond shortness.
29th November, 2006 Board 10 Both Vul
What does 4♦ mean here? Yes, it’s a Splinter bid … shortness in their suit, Spade support, and enough for game. But we would say that this hand is not suitable for that, just not enough trumps … normally we have 4 of them for a Splinter, holding only 3 may not be enough for us to take advantage of the ruffs on the board, especially when all 3 of them are honors. So, we’d suggest 3♦ instead, showing Spade support and invitational values or better.
21st February, 2007 Board 32 E-W Vul
We may have only an 11-count, but our hand has considerable slam potential, don’t you think? Yes, indeed, and the question is how to express that slam interest. Here are some options: - 3♥: No, this is not an option, with standard agreements this bid is non-forcing, let’s remember that Partner’s 2/1 was in competition. - 4♥: This shows enough for game, of course, but does not do justice to our slam potential. - 4NT: Roman Key Card won’t help much on this hand, Partner is virtually certain to have at least one of the two missing Key Cards, and finding out that he really does will leave us none the wiser as to whether his hand is slam suitable. For example, give him ♠ 62 ♥ AQJT9 ♦ KJ96 ♣ 75 and he would be good value for his 2♥ bid, and would have one of the requested Key Cards, but would not have a slam suitable hand by any means. - 3♣: “If in doubt, then cue-bid” is a common refrain when faced with a difficult bidding problem, but here it may not help us. For example, suppose that after our 3♣, Partner bids 3♦. Now we can try a forcing 3♥, but Partner won’t know whether we have serious Heart support, or whether we are still fishing for the best game. He’ll assume the latter until proven otherwise, so will next show us a 5th Diamond or doubleton Spade support, or even bid 3NT, none of which help us much in our slam search. - 4♣: Splintering with a singleton Ace? Generally, this is a no-no but here it figures to work rather well! Partner will be in no doubt about our Heart support and slam interest, so things will be less fuzzy than in the aforementioned cue-bidding sequence.
Yes, we rather like the unorthodox Splinter bid, it seems the most likely way to get Partner’s cooperation and opinion in our slam hunt. As it breaks with the conventional wisdom about not splintering with an Ace, perhaps we should analyze why it might be a good idea on this particular occasion: - We are not in a game-forcing auction - We have no way (other than the Splinter) of agreeing Hearts below game while also establishing a force - We are less worried than we might sometimes be about misleading Partner in Clubs, because the enemy has bid that suit … so the chances of Partner discounting the “useless” K♣ (but really useful, it would provide a Diamond pitch) are greatly reduced, he probably doesn’t have that card.
7th June, 2006 Board 27 None Vul
Yes, this is a 4♣ bid! Club support? No, not exactly! We are in a forcing auction, Partner has identified our fit in Spades, so this jump is shortness, inviting Partner to re-evaluate her hand opposite a Club singleton or void. As luck would have it, she has a moderate hand, with AQT75 opposite our shortness. Not a good holding, too much wastage, so she signs off in 4♠. Making 11 tricks as it happens.
13th September, 2006 Board 31 N-S Vul
That 4♣ bid was (by partnership agreement) a Splinter bid, showing game-going values, and shortness in Clubs. South has limited her hand (and North knows that, of course) so, for slam purposes, South must evaluate her hand in that context. She has a truly magnificent hand in that context! Let’s look at the plus factors: - a perfect Club holding (nothing wasted opposite Partner’s shortness) - a 4th trump (which was not guaranteed by the 2♠ bid) - great controls
A more slammish hand is hard to construct (well, we could also have the Q♠!), and this hand should be ready to commit itself to slam. Does it seem a little odd that South should be making such a decision? It shouldn’t, Partner asked our opinion with that 4♣ Splinter, and our opinion is “We love our hand!”
6th June, 2007 Board 21 N-S Vul
Clearly we want to take this one to game, the question is “How?” - 4♠? Not a good idea, we have some defense here, and we don’t want Partner taking a phantom sacrifice if the opponents bid on to the 5-level. Better to reserve those 4♠ bids for purely preemptive hand-types. - 2♦? That’s altogether too delicate, we need to support Spades right away, we’d hate the bidding to get to the 5-level before we support Partner. - 2♣? That will show some strength and Spade support, but it also gives our non-vulnerable opponents plenty of space in which to find a profitable sacrifice. - 4♥? Yes, that’s our choice, hopefully Partner will be on the same wavelength and read this as a Splinter. If so, it’s perfect … Heart shortness, and some values, enough to try for game. Another benefit is that it gets the auction high in a hurry, it’ll be harder for the opponents to find a profitable sacrifice, especially if that sacrifice is in Clubs.
3rd October, 2007 Board 9 E-W Vul
West is just about good enough to insist on game, and the question is how? The two options are: - A simple raise to 4♠ - A Splinter raise to 4♣, showing Club shortness
This one looks easy to us, we normally avoid splintering with a singleton Ace or King, it paints a misleading picture for Partner. When we splinter we are asking “How do you like your hand opposite this shortness?” and Partner will assume that the shortness is a small card (or a void). Opposite a singleton Deuce a holding of KQJx is rather poor, a wastage of values, and with this holding we would be discouraged from pursuing a slam. But, opposite a singleton Ace, that KQJx holding is rather fine. The conclusion is that a bid of 4♠ is more descriptive than the Splinter.
© BES, Inc All Rights Reserved | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
