[jdeegan]

Playing 2/1. Partner opens 1♠ first seat. With no interference you respond 2♣ (game forcing) and partner rebids 3♥. What should this 'unneeded' jump show?

[SoTired]

without discussion, splinter supporting clubs

[the hog]

As above.

[kenrexford]

There are different schools of thought here.

My personal preference is a type of fit-showing jump. It shows club support (4+), with two of the top three clubs, three of the top four spades, a stiff in hearts (not stiff King or Ace), and no 1st/2nd-round diamond control (highest diamond the Queen, at least two diamonds). It would not "agree" clubs, because I'd allow partner to bid 2♣ as a convenience bid with spade support, such that a 3♠ call from partner would revert us to the spade fit as the agreed trump suit. Also, we are allowed to end up at 3NT (unless partner reverts to spades). Finally, as the call is below 3NT, there is no strong additional requirement as to strength or shape other than as specified in the definition.

Others play this differently, of course.

[the hog]

"It shows club support (4+), with two of the top three clubs, three of the top four spades, a stiff in hearts (not stiff King or Ace), and no 1st/2nd-round diamond control (highest diamond the Queen, at least two diamonds). "

Ken with such stringent requirements for the bid, have you ever had one of these splinters in your bridge playing career or are you still waiting?

[Adebisi]

55♥♠ with extras.

[HeartA]

The_Hog, on Jan 5 2007, 01:25 AM, said:

"It shows club support (4+), with two of the top three clubs, three of the top four spades, a stiff in hearts (not stiff King or Ace), and no 1st/2nd-round diamond control (highest diamond the Queen, at least two diamonds). "

Ken with such stringent requirements for the bid, have you ever had one of these splinters in your bridge playing career or are you still waiting?

another LOL

Oh, yes, I agree 3H is unnecessary jump (splinter for club support)

[whereagles]

There are many ways to play this:

1. Splinter
2. 55 with extras (around 15-20)
3. 54 with a max hand (18-20 or thereabouts), slam try

The interpretation I prefer is 3 because it's a well defined and limited bid. Sure, it eats up 1 level of bidding, but it has the advantage of stating very clearly that the partnership is in slam region.

Interpretation 2 is ok, but it doesn't come up too often and is somewhat undefined as to strength.

Interpretation 1 is not good unless you agree to a specific hcp range with pard. Otherwise responder will be in the dark as to which level the partnership should play.

[Chamaco]

No one plays picture jumps anymore ? :-)

[helene_t]

Chamaco, on Jan 5 2007, 01:56 PM, said:

No one plays picture jumps anymore ? :-)

Normally a picture jump applies when two suit have been bid. If this was a picture jump, it would show values concentrated in ♠,♣ and ♥. Then you might as well call it a ♦ splinter.

But you could play this as a 5-5M with values concentrated in your suits.

[mcphee]

I believe for most who play 2/1 this jump is a splinter. The other ideas given may work for some but would not be a choice for me.

Also voice concern over a picture showing idea from Ken as impractical. Players need not use energy for system bids that are extremely low %.

[pclayton]

The enlightened play this as a splinter.

Here's a couple more that I think are more in doubt:

1. 1♠ - 2♣ - 2♥ - 3♠
2. 1♠ - 2♦ - 2N - 4♣

[ArcLight]

From Mike Lawrences 2/1 system notes (books & CD)

Jump shift to new suit – 2 treatments (both good)
Discuss with pard which treatment to use!!

1 ) Two GOOD suits. 8 – AQJ87 – Q8 – KQJT5, but NOT AK – Q9763-J-AKQ87 (hearts are weak, even with 19 HCP). Bid 2D with the later, despite the HCP.

2 ) Splinter. Keeps the bidding lower than a double jump to the 4 level. You can play that a double jump then shows a void.

[mikeh]

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

[inquiry]

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.

[EricK]

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?

[inquiry]

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...

[neilkaz]

Ben, I don't want to take this thread OT, but have you had some issues with the fact that MisIry can also be a transfer preempt ? They are easy to defend against, IMHO, but I would expect that once a while opps have intervened thinking you were preempting, but you had the strong hand ?

[inquiry]

neilkaz, on Jan 5 2007, 02:21 PM, said:

Ben, I don't want to take this thread OT, but have you had some issues with the fact that MisIry can also be a transfer preempt ? They are easy to defend against, IMHO, but I would expect that once a while opps have intervened thinking you were preempting, but you had the strong hand ?

I appreciate the two bites of the apple that transfer preempts offer, and I would not play transfer preempts as the only option for such bids because of this. However, while it is true they MisIry can be a trasfer preempt (and in fact, they slightly tend to be transfer preempt, but not by that much) it can also be a strong two suiter.

This combination presents some interesting problems for the other side. For instance if they bid and it not a transfer preempt and we have a misfit (ouch). But if they they take a wait and see attitude, they lose a lot of the two bites of the apple approach available if it could only be a transfer preempt. Also they have to deal with the hands where the overcaller will know (due to his holding in the alleged preemptive suit) that you DO NOT have a preempt, but how can he show that hand? Cue-bid it? That takes away some of options when you do have the preempt. Jump in the suit? That coudl them too high, especially if he was wrong about your preempt.

You pick up enough on their difficulty in competiting, not only when weak, but also when strong (they have trouble biddign 3♠ on hands they would have overcalled 1♠ for example without any trouble), to make up for the extra advantages they get with slow and fast type direct seat actions Also, it is much less safe to double 3C-P-3D-? where 3C has to be weak with diamonds and 3D is to play than to dobule 3D if 3C could only be weak.

I don't mean these to downplay the problem, but rather to show some of the other complications.