[luke warm]

what are the theoretical drawbacks to hardy's raises of 1M, as he described in his book? to refresh some, he used 'under j/s' (1♥ : 3♦ & 1♠ : 3♥) to show a game forcing limit raise, 9-12, 4 trumps, with stiff or void and 'over j/s' (1♥ : 3♠ & 1♠ : 3N) to show 12-15 with a stiff/void

he also used inverted swiss raises, 1M : 4♣ to show the "Jacoby" type balanced hand with 2 of the top 3 honors (if 4 cards), or the ace or king (if 5+) and 1M : 4♦ for the same hand without the shown honor support in trumps, and reserved 1M : 2N for 16+ balanced

outside of losing bergen raises (and, i guess, fit jumps), is the above less effective for some reason than the way most now play?

[inquiry]

Hi Jimmy,

Disadvantages -

1) Lose strong jumpshift (I don't play them so no problem for me)
2) Lose weak jumpshifts (I don't play them, so no problem for me)
3) Lose splimit (mini-splinters for hte under bid), I don't play them any more so no problem for me
4) Lose Bergen (I don't play them, so no problem for me)
5) Lose fit jumps (I do play them below at three level below my suit, so problem for me)
6) Offer lead directing double possibibilities (problem for under), or save suggesting doubles (problem for 3♠ over 3♥)
7) The miniimum GF splinter (one under) gains nothing over the normal normal splinter above the three level of the original suit

Advantages -
1) Allows you to make a splinter with a really good hand (the maxi-splinter thingee)

Many of the disadvantages will not hurt everyone, since you can play both strong JS and weak JS for instance. However, the advantage of this methiod is very limited. In fact, I am not suer it is an advantage at all. Because I use 2NT as a limit raise +, and opener shows either no game interest (opposite limit raise), game force but little to no slam interest, or slam interest. Opposite any of these, if I want, I can now show shortness (essentially the maxi-splinter hand Hardy uses) or not, depending upon my feeling after hearing what partner has said about his hand.

Ben

[luke warm]

hi ben, thanks

the only real advantage i see is in slam bidding, but i grant that an experienced p'ship can pretty much get there anyway... but it does seem nice to know that partner has 9-12 or 13-15 with the splinter, as well as an ability via relays to find out cheaply whether or not the shortness is a stiff or a void

i don't recall in hardy's book a bid for 0-6 with 4 trumps or 7-9 (bergen's preempt and constructive raises), tho my memory might not be the best

[inquiry]

My partners splinter with 12-15 hcp NEVER.. (too strong to splinter)....

Ben

[luke warm]

inquiry, on Jun 4 2004, 07:19 PM, said:

My partners splinter with 12-15 hcp NEVER.. (too strong to splinter)....

Ben

i suppose that's true, in a sense... the good thing about the bid is, opener by bidding 4M right away says "it doesn't matter where your shortness is, i see no slam by my hand"

the school's still out on 2NT though... i like your limit+ bid, but i also like 13-15 balanced without support (maybe doubleton)... i guess the biggest drawback to 2NT as limit+ is the range itself, but it's not *that* big a drawback (if at all)

[inquiry]

You are free to use 2♠ over 1♥ and 3♣ over 1♠ as game forcing (think jacoby) bids, and keep 2NT as balanced whatever you want. Of course, I wrap balanced hands up with my 2♣ response, but that is a different situation all together.

Ben

[Trpltrbl]

inquiry, on Jun 14 2004, 11:30 AM, said:

You are free to use 2♠ over 1♥ and 3♣ over 1♠ as game forcing (think jacoby) bids, and keep 2NT as balanced whatever you want.

Ben

More and more people are starting to use that approach again. I like it.

Mike

[Cascade]

inquiry, on Jun 4 2004, 02:19 PM, said:

My partners splinter with 12-15 hcp NEVER.. (too strong to splinter)....

Ben

I splinter at the three-level with a wide range.

In the developments we show range and controls.

It seems to be a very efficient structure.

e.g.

1♠ 3♦
3♥ relay for controls
3♠ any invite < 11/12
3NT GF 2 controls
4♣ GF 3 controls etc