[dickiegera]

---

Made 7. King of spades on side singleton.

We should be in 6♠.
How to bid? Open 2♣?

Opinions please.

[SteveMoe]

Would respond 2♣ and not 1N with East's hand.
Would also rebid 3♣ and not 4♠ with West hand. Very close to 2♣ opener.
Could open 2♣ to begin with, but not essential. We need specific help from partner, and starting with 2♣ might remove valuable space from the auction.

[Antrax]

2/1 GF:

1♠-2♣
2♠*-2NT**
3♠-4♦
KC-etc

* default rebid, could be 5-3-3-2 min
** weak NT opener, guarantees no singleton

Since our 2NT conveniently promises at least doubleton, W can set trump and show SI, and then E has an easy cue bid.

[ahydra]

4 losers, 8-ish playing tricks - I think this is a 2C opening, although it is borderline. You can see the problem here that (if playing 4S rebid to show a weak hand with lots of spades) you don't have a good rebid to show this amount of strength.

Of course, on the given auction if 4S does show a hand like this then East must re-evaluate his hand and look for slam. The real question is: why did East bid 1NT not 2C? East has a GF hand. Then 1S-2C; 3NT (too strong for 3S)-4D; 4NT-5D (1 or 4); 6S

ahydra

[dickiegera]

dickiegera, on 2014-January-04, 22:41, said:

---

Made 7. King of spades on side singleton.

We should be in 6♠.
How to bid? Open 2♣?

Opinions please.

---

Sorry, I had East hand wrong. No King of diamonds. Only 10 pts. We play 2/1 so a 2♣ bid was not available

[TWO4BRIDGE]

dickiegera, on 2014-January-05, 08:15, said:

---

Sorry, I had East hand wrong. No King of diamonds. Only 10 pts. We play 2/1 so a 2♣ bid was not available

1S - 1NT! ( forcing 1 round ... playing 2/1 GF )
4D! ( self-splinter* for ♠, showing good, long ♠ suit )
..... - 4H ( Ctrl-cue accepting ♠ as trump )
4NT - 5D ( 1 or 4 )
6S
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
* [ EDIT addition ] : Since 3D would be a forcing bid, then 4D! is the generic definition of a splinter = " a jump over a forcing suit bid -- agreeing the last bid suit ( ♠ in this case ) " .

[kenberg]

I think getting confiently to 6♠ is tough. To see why, imagine playing this hand on the lead of the queen of hearts. Winning on the board and running the Jack of spades seems like a very bad idea. If it loses to the King and a diamond comes back there goes your entry so you lose a heart and the contract. So you win the heart in hand and, probably, lead a small spade just in case there is a 4-0 split. You win the return, draw trump, cash the top clubs, get to the board with whichever red suit entry still exists, and toss a heart on the Queen of clubs.

The point is that you are making use of every one of dummy's high cards. I have no bidding gadget to inform me that partner has the Jack of Spades, the King of Hearts, the Ace of Diamonds, and the Queen of Clubs.

OK, if we waited for a sure thing we would neveer do anything in bridge or in life, but still I think there will be some concerns.

Would I open 2♣? Maybe. Not so much to get to salm as because I can think of lots of hands where if I open 1♠ I might be scoring up +170. But if I do open this with 2♣ I think it will still be iffy. 2♣-2♦-2♠-2NT I suppose. Maybe 2♦ shopwed values, it does with some, but if it didn't then the 2NT rebid did. But now what?

I'm fine with the TWO4 auction, but I suggest that after the 4♦ self-splinter it might be best for the responding hand to take over with rkc. Let's say that they are playing 1430. 4♦(splinter)-4NT-5♦(3, not 0 on the auction)-5♥(Queen ask)-6♣-6♠. Might E be worried that the missing key is in clubs or hearts? Yes, but then spades are solid and Qxx of hearts might well be adequate to bring this in.

[MrAce]

It would not even occur to me to open this 2♣

I like the auction Two4bridge wrote with self splinter. Most play opening 1♠ and then bidding 4♠ to show a hand that was too good to open 4♠ but definitely not a huge hand like this one.

[gwnn]

For sure I open 2♣. The fact that you plan to rebid 3♣ on a doubleton rather than 3♠ should be a clue.

[fromageGB]

My guideline for 2♣ is around a 20 count and no more than a trick less than game. This is low on points, but the aces almost make up for it. It sits near the cusp of 1♠ and 2♣, and I would not seriously argue against either of them. Too good for 4♠.

I lean towards 1♠, and if responder can assume that Two4's self splinter is a 7 card suit (reasonable), then as this is obviously a GF opposite a weak non-fitting hand, and responder has a powerhouse in context, responder has to take over.
1♠ 1NT
4♦ 4NT(key card ask)
5♥(3 and the Q) 6♠
There is an ace missing, but surely opener must have more yet for his jump to 4♦, so I bid the slam as I have an beautifully fitting hand opposite that bid. If opener had 4 aces I would be looking for 7.

You may have different ways of showing 3 key cards and the Q, but it's the same result. It just depends on opener having the judgement and faith in using the splinter, and responder recognising the implied strength and realising the power of his fitting hand.

[kenberg]

fromageGB, on 2014-January-06, 05:56, said:

My guideline for 2♣ is around a 20 count and no more than a trick less than game. This is low on points, but the aces almost make up for it. It sits near the cusp of 1♠ and 2♣, and I would not seriously argue against either of them. Too good for 4♠.

I lean towards 1♠, and if responder can assume that Two4's self splinter is a 7 card suit (reasonable), then as this is obviously a GF opposite a weak non-fitting hand, and responder has a powerhouse in context, responder has to take over.
1♠ 1NT
4♦ 4NT(key card ask)
5♥(3 and the Q) 6♠
There is an ace missing, but surely opener must have more yet for his jump to 4♦, so I bid the slam as I have an beautifully fitting hand opposite that bid. If opener had 4 aces I would be looking for 7.

You may have different ways of showing 3 key cards and the Q, but it's the same result. It just depends on opener having the judgement and faith in using the splinter, and responder recognizing the implied strength and realizing the power of his fitting hand.

Whether it's a good sign or a bad sign for you, we are in agreement here about responder taking over after the splinter. The slam needs every high card responder has, and only he knows that he has them. As you note, my responses to rkc differ from yours, we sort on the Q when we have two keys, so as mentioned above it's 4NT-5♦(3/0, clearly 3 here)-5♥(Q ask).

I am not sure what gwnn is gettng at with his worry about a 3♣ call on AK. Suppose resonder has the hand originally posted with the AKx of diamonds. He bids 2♣. No, I don't raise to 3♣. I just rebid 2♠. No rush, and this suit does not qualify for 3♠ imo. With that original hand, with AKx of diamonds, I think it goes 1♠-2♣-2♠-2NT-3♠-4♠-4NT etc. There are twelve easy tricks, 13 if the spade hook is on, and I can't see any problems in the bidding or the play.

[the_dude]

I think 2♣ is perfectly reasonable on this hand - there are a number of 2-4 point responder hands that may make game. And you have adequate defense.

It's a partnership thing tho - if your partnership precludes this then the self-splinter is the next best thing.

[mycroft]

As far as I'm concerned, if partner *can't* take over after my splinter, I shouldn't have splintered. (okay, okay, 1M-3m "limit or huge" splinter...) Yes, 4♦ beautifully shows this hand - if partner plays it and gets it. But after 4♠ rebid (that should *not* be "overstrength 4♠ opener", it should be 20-ish, spade suit good enough to play, possibly hoping for no void) East should make one move at least. Whether he can get the ♦A and the ♥K out in one call, I don't know.

[ArtK78]

I absolutely hate opening 2♣ on the West hand. 4 losers is one too many for a suit based 2♣ opener for me.

I like the 4♦ rebid. That seems like the best description of the West hand. East should make a positive move over 4♦, and slam should be reached.

By the way, 1♠ - 1NT - 3♦ is not a splinter unless you have a very non-standard agreement as to rebids over 1NT. I do have non-standard agreements for rebids over 1NT, and, for me, I could bid 3♣ artificial and forcing. But I like 4♦ on these cards.

[billw55]

kenberg, on 2014-January-05, 10:06, said:

I think getting confiently to 6♠ is tough. To see why, imagine playing this hand on the lead of the queen of hearts. Winning on the board and running the Jack of spades seems like a very bad idea. If it loses to the King and a diamond comes back there goes your entry so you lose a heart and the contract.

I don't follow. Doesn't declarer just play both diamonds, pitch his heart loser and claim?

(edit: irrelevant comment, I missed post #5. Clearly I can edit my post though.)

Anyway, I don't like opening 2♣. The hand seems a good example of the strength of 2/1, the immediate game force allowing slam investigation at low levels.

How would a precision auction go?

[fromageGB]

billw55, on 2014-January-06, 13:56, said:

Doesn't declarer just play both diamonds, pitch his heart loser and claim?

Think you missed post #5

[neilkaz]

fromageGB, on 2014-January-06, 14:24, said:

Think you missed post #5

Can't the OP edit his original post?

[neilkaz]

I don't mind a 2♣ opener with what looks to be 9 tricks and being this prime, but if you have the ability to open 1♠ and then self splinter 4♦ I prefer that.

[akwoo]

I open 2♣. I have 8.5+ playing tricks in spades and 4 quick tricks on defense.

But I don't get to slam. I don't see how East ever figures out his hand is actually worth a full 3 tricks.

[hautbois]

Even with the edit, I don't think playing 6♠ will be a problem on a heart lead. Win in hand, then A♠ and another. Only a diamond lead affords you the luxury of trying the spade finesse.