[joker_gib]

Scoring: IMP

---

You are dealer and south :

1♦ (-) 1♠ (-)
?

You don't splay mini splinter ! What's your bid ?

[Winstonm]

Jlall, on Feb 9 2008, 12:41 PM, said:

I am a 2S bidder with this. I believe in fairly sound 3S bids in a natural system base, and bidding 3S with this makes your range too wide. This also ties in well to not opening crappy hands. This also ties in well with responding with crappy hands. This also ties in with making game tries aggressively over this auction. Basically this ties into a whole style, and you could play a completely different style but it should be based on all of the factors I mentioned.

If you were to play a strong club (yes I know which forum this is ) you could bid 3S with this (or 2H if u play with jdonn ) which ties in well to opening crappy hands and playing limited openers.

You've been watching too much "Caddyshack" - "Want to tie me up with your tie, Ty?"

[cherdano]

2S, this isn't close to me. Even if I had an invitational club splinter available (as I did with hannie - has anyone seen him lately btw?), I would not use it on this hand.

[jdonn]

Even in a strong club I think this is easy 2♠ if the choice is just between that and 3♠.

[joker_gib]

cherdano, on Feb 9 2008, 07:09 PM, said:

2S, this isn't close to me. Even if I had an invitational club splinter available (as I did with hannie - has anyone seen him lately btw?), I would not use it on this hand.

Well Arend, for once, I don't agree with you !

Well, I think that if I have the mini splinter available I would use it for this type of borderline hand...

Justin adn Josh, If you had the mini available, would you use it ?

[han]

I would bid 2S even if I had a mini-splinter available which I do with my regular partner. No, haven't seen hannie, I think he left.

[kenrexford]

This situation is one key argument for why I have for years required an unbalanced hand to open 1♦. Now, when I rebid 2♠, partner will know that I have spade support, real diamonds (4+), a stiff or void on the outside (and hence about 3 distributional points), and enough to otherwise open (range now about 13+ to 17- net points). He can bid 2NT to ask for more info, allowing me to bid 3♣ to show my stiff.

Sure, this means that my 1♣-P-1♠-P-2♠ sequences, when unbalanced, are not known to be unbalanced (not a great loss to only cover one minor when the alternative is neither), and when balanced either minor could be better. But, experience tells me that this works in the long run. Plus, if I really want to play mini-splinters by opener, 1♣...3♦ and 1♣...3♥ are both available, whereas 1♦...3♣ probably is not a mini-splinter.

[mike777]

joker_gib, on Feb 9 2008, 12:36 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

---

You are dealer and south :

1♦ (-) 1♠ (-)
?

You don't splay mini splinter ! What's your bid ?

2s wtp?

[jdonn]

joker_gib, on Feb 9 2008, 01:20 PM, said:

Justin adn Josh, If you had the mini available, would you use it ?

No I would still have a hand worth 3♠ if not playing them.

[Edmunte1]

2♠ is enough, too many losers(6) for 3♠. Bidding 3♠ with this hand will result more often in going overboard than in reaching a thin game

[P_Marlowe]

3S.

This should also show at least 5-4 or
an unbal. hand.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

Edmunte1, on Feb 9 2008, 06:09 PM, said:

2♠ is enough, too many losers(6) for 3♠. Bidding 3♠ with this hand will result more often in going overboard than in reaching a thin game

Hi,

I can live with bidding 2S, but if you are using
LTC, as I do, than 3S is clear, because 3S does
show a 6 looser hand.

I think you can downgrade this to 6,5, and if
you believe in sound invites, than 2S is clear,
but if you count this as 6, than 3S it is.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mike777]

P_Marlowe, on Feb 9 2008, 06:22 PM, said:

Edmunte1, on Feb 9 2008, 06:09 PM, said:

2♠ is enough, too many losers(6)  for 3♠. Bidding 3♠ with this hand will result more often in going overboard than in reaching a thin game

Hi,

I can live with bidding 2S, but if you are using
LTC, as I do, than 3S is clear, because 3S does
show a 6 looser hand.

I think you can downgrade this to 6,5, and if
you believe in sound invites, than 2S is clear,
but if you count this as 6, than 3S it is.

With kind regards
Marlowe

In my Klinger LTC book this is a 6.5 loser hand not 6/.
Not close.

[P_Marlowe]

mike777, on Feb 9 2008, 06:30 PM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Feb 9 2008, 06:22 PM, said:

Edmunte1, on Feb 9 2008, 06:09 PM, said:

2♠ is enough, too many losers(6)  for 3♠. Bidding 3♠ with this hand will result more often in going overboard than in reaching a thin game

Hi,

I can live with bidding 2S, but if you are using
LTC, as I do, than 3S is clear, because 3S does
show a 6 looser hand.

I think you can downgrade this to 6,5, and if
you believe in sound invites, than 2S is clear,
but if you count this as 6, than 3S it is.

With kind regards
Marlowe

In my Klinger LTC book this is a 6.5 loser hand not 6/.
Not close.

I wont argue with downgrading this to 6,5, but personnally
I dont really use the adjustment factors, I just look at the hand
and ask myself, if I can I live with the result of the raw count
(= 6 loosers, no discussion about that), and if yes, I make the bid.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[skjaeran]

2♠. In my methods I've shown anunbalanced hand with this sequence, but I'd bid the same with standard methods.

The hand just isn't worth 3♠ - I completely echo Justin's first post here.

I don't understand employing a 3♣ splinter - how would you bid a monster 2-suiter then?

[Cascade]

2♠ that is how I show a minimum opening with some spades.

Sure I have a good minimum so I will accept any move from partner.

[cherdano]

skaeran, on Feb 10 2008, 02:04 AM, said:

I don't understand employing a 3♣ splinter - how would you bid a monster 2-suiter then?

Hannie plays that 1♦ can't be strong balanced, that 2N is a forcing raise of spades (no shortness unless superstrong), and so 3♠ can show an invitational hand with club shortness. Han seems to have copied that.

[han]

Hmm yes, that's what I play as well.

[hatchett]

I also consider 2♠ clear on this hand.