[EricK]

inquiry, on Jan 5 2007, 07:04 PM, said:

EricK, on Jan 5 2007, 01:12 PM, said:

inquiry, on Jan 5 2007, 04:45 PM, said:

I use it as splinter, because I simply can not have strong 5-5 hand and open 1♠ (I have a conventional opening for those hands).... so the strong 5-5 type hands are not possible (for me) leaving only splinter.

But surely you can have a 2 suiter which is strong in context?

Nope.. I play a convention invented or at least explained to me by my friend Mishovnbg in which ALL strong two suited hand (and it doesn't have to be taht strong) are opened either 2NT, 3C, or 3D... At best I could be 5-4, 6-4, 7-4 and strong, never 5-5 or better and strong. Search this forum for Misiry if you are curious...

Unless all two suited hands which are strong enough to be opened are opened conventionally then you will have a two suited hand which is not strong enough for your conventional opener but is strong enough to open. Some of those hands will strong in context.

I am not suggesting that a jumping to the three level after a 2/1 on those hands is a good idea (nor that it is a bad idea for that matter).

[kenrexford]

The stringent ("LOL") requirements that I place on the Splinter do result in this call "coming up" quite frequently, in a sense. Any call that has definition defines by negative inference any auction that does not make use of the defined call. Thus, alternative auctions will always be different from this holding, whether:

(1) less quality to the spade suit,
(2) a diamond control,
(3) less quality to the club suit, or
(4) a stiff heart that is the Ace or King.

So, the bid does come up, in a sense, quite frequently.

On a bigger picture. The more fine-tuning of methods that you have for slam-approach auctions, the less likely it is that any one route will occur. Thus, each opportunity for a specific auction is reduced. However, definition permeates.

For instance, consider a more mundane raise of the major.

Back in the day, there were two main options (less than GF). Simple raise (6-9) or jump raise (limit). These two bids would be quite frequently made, but neither was very well defined. Add in forcing no trump, constructive raises, and Bergen Raises, and your ability to distinguish hands increases tremendously.

However, you now use 2♥, 1NT...2♥, 3♥, and (3♣ or 3♦) to show hands that were once bid with a simple 2♥. That means each option occurs, say, only 25% as mich as a simple 2♥. But, now the "simple" 2♥ means something different because three possible alternatives have been removed from the old 2♥ call. Or, when someone now bids 2♥, he is, in a sense, having the three other alternatives "come up" because the ability to use the three other alternatives defines the parameters of the 2♥ call.

[Winstonm]

mikeh, on Jan 5 2007, 11:33 AM, said:

I like the even-handed treatment described by Lawrence. In one partnership, my partner prefers this to show two strong 5-5 suits, while in all others I play or played splinters: as one might therefore suspect, I prefer splinters, but either is playable. Splinters, to me, are more interesting, perhaps because I love bidding slams

Lawrence's recommendations are totally playable either way. I prefer the splinter as it eliminates a possible holding for the direct raise and saves a level of bidding from the 4-level splinter.

So if you do play 3H as splinter, what is 4H - void?

Also, I want to defend Ken a little bit here by paraphrasing what Lawrence has said about 2/1, that one of its strengths is that you do not have to jump to show strength and therefore jumps should be tightly defined - maybe not to Ken's extent, but that is his choice and it by no means "wrong".