[skjaeran]

This is an auto-splinter to me, setting spades.

Normally 6331, possibly 7330 or 6241 with bad diamonds.
Auto-splinters could be on singletons for me, whereas all direct splinters showing support for partners opening suit shows voids.

[Codo]

I agree with Wayne that this is an autosplinter as long as we have another way to show a slaminteressted one-suiter which needed just some outside cues to make slam.

[jillybean]

Just to clarify what people are calling auto or self splinters; it is a splinter supporting your own suit but obviously partner must bid the suit in response to a transfer or stayman bid first.

I do not distinguish between splinters containing a singleton or void as Harald does. Is this the standard, expert treatment?

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean2, on Apr 16 2008, 01:44 AM, said:

<snip>
I do not distinguish between splinters containing a singleton or void as Harald does. Is this the standard, expert treatment?

No, certainly not.

But I dont claim to be an expert.

There are several schemes out there, one is,
that after a splinter the next steps asks partner
if the splinter is a single or a void, combining
this with a key card ask.

Splinters are similar to cue bids, some play, that
the 1st cue in a suit shows 1st round round, others,
that the first cue in a suit is either 1st or 2nd round
control.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[kenrexford]

Looking back at the original question (splinter or cue?), a "rest of the story" seems missing.

A common scheme:

1NT-P-transfer-P-major-P-?

3OM = sets trumps, demands cues (strong slam move; serious 3NT, LTTC)
4M = mild slam move (would Texas is no interest)
JS = Splinter

One problem is the transfer to hearts and then 3♠, which sounds like a splinter but is also 3OM. That usually means no ability to make a JS to spades after showing hearts as a splinter. Although I have not until now thought of it, it seems that the "solution" is for a jump to 4♥ to actually be a spade splinter and for 3♠ to show mild+ interest, as serious 3NT and LTTC can help a lot.

There is also another problem, though. Whereas a transfer to spades and then 3♥ allows a trump cue (3♠), a cue in the other suit (4♥, if not LTTC), and serious 3NT, the OM 3♠ call, with hearts agrees, preempts the ability to make any trump cue and preempts the ability to make any spade cue. Perhaps 3NT by Opener should not be a serious 3NT but rather a spade cue?

Also, this suggests to me that somewhat aggressive super-acceptances of transfers to hearts makes sense. I use 2NT as a 3-card super-accept (two of top three honors in hearts and primes outside) because of this.

[han]

jillybean2, on Apr 16 2008, 01:44 AM, said:

Just to clarify what people are calling auto or self splinters; it is a splinter supporting your own suit but obviously partner must bid the suit in response to a transfer or stayman bid first.

No that's not , necessary, for example 1D-1H-1NT-4C.

Instead of thinking of a splinter as "showing support", you could think of a splinter as "setting trump". 4C in this auction sets hearts as trumps and shows slam interest with club shortness.

[pclayton]

I have no idea what is standard in these sequences, but if I had to guess it would be KC Gerber since 4N is clearly quant. What is strange to me if you play 4♣ as KC that you can splinter in all suits but clubs.

There's two sensible solutions:

1. Ace Scientific (aka BUST - Balanced and Unbalanced Slam Tries). This is similar to what Ken suggests: 3OM is an unbalanced slam try with shortage (next step asks), 4♣ is RKC and 4♦ is a balanced slam try. Some modern folks invert 4♣ and 4♦.

2. Transfer Extensions. 1N - 2♦ - 2♥ - 3♦ is a slam try in hearts. I suppose you can play splinters throughout with this mechanism. The nice thing about this sequence is that responder doesn't have to immediately commit with shortage or not, and can just get opener to cue.

[jillybean]

han, on Apr 16 2008, 07:05 AM, said:

jillybean2, on Apr 16 2008, 01:44 AM, said:

Just to clarify what people are calling auto or self splinters;  it is a splinter supporting your own suit but obviously partner must bid the suit in response to a transfer or stayman bid first.

No that's not , necessary, for example 1D-1H-1NT-4C.

Instead of thinking of a splinter as "showing support", you could think of a splinter as "setting trump". 4C in this auction sets hearts as trumps and shows slam interest with club shortness.

Han, I would mistake this as a strong 6♥/5♣ hand, offering a choice of game.

Maybe 1♦-1♥-1nt-3♣ shows that hand

[jillybean]

To continue...

if 1♦:1♥ 1n:4♣ is a self splinter in ♥'s then

1♦:1♥
1nt:2♣*
2x :3♣ is gf 6♥/5♣

1♦:1♥
1nt:2♣ is 4sf

1♦:1♥
1nt:3♣ would be invitaional 6♥/5♣ ?

[mikeh]

jillybean2, on Apr 16 2008, 11:30 PM, said:

To continue...

if 1♦:1♥  1n:4♣ is a self splinter in ♥'s then

1♦:1♥
1nt:2♣*
2x :3♣  is gf 6♥/5♣ 

1♦:1♥
1nt:2♣  is 4sf

1♦:1♥
1nt:3♣  would be invitaional 6♥/5♣  ?

A lot depends on agreements (so what else is new?)

If you play any form of new minor after a 1N rebid, then it is easier to play with the 3-level meanings.

My current approach is that a new suit at the 3-level (1x 1y 1N 3z) is 5-5 or better (note this includes 6-5 hands) game force with little outside the suits: AKJxx AQJxx would be typical. It asks opener to evaluate honours in my suits, and Ace and, to lesser degree, Kings outside.

A jump rebid of responder's suit can be usefully played either as invitational or forcing (obviously not as both). I currently play it as forcing, with slam invitational values, a good 6+ suit.

This scheme works very well in conjunction with 2 way nmf, since non 'picture bids' go through 2♦ and then show the second suit or rebid the first suit, and this also shows slam interest, but with more scattered values. And al invitational hands go through the 2♣ puppet to 2♦ over the 1N rebid.

I don't know what sayc uses, but I would strongly advise using 3 level new suits as forcing.

I haven't yet spoken of jumping to 3 of partner's suit over his 1N rebid. This can be played as invitational or as strong... again, if you use 2 way nmf, I would suggest using the 3 level bid as strong... you can always bid 2♣ over 1N, to force 2♦, and then raise partner's suit to the 3-level with all invitational raise hands.

Using old fashioned nmf poses slightly different considerations.

1♣ 1♠ 1N 2♦ 2N 3♣... is this forcing in your methods or invitational?

If that is forcing, then use the jump over 1N as invitational, and vice versa.

Don't worry too much about catering to 6-5 hands... they are very rare and you won't go too far wrong by initially showing 5=5... you can always rebid the 6 card suit later if you have the need and the opportunity.

[skjaeran]

jillybean2, on Apr 16 2008, 08:44 AM, said:

Just to clarify what people are calling auto or self splinters; it is a splinter supporting your own suit but obviously partner must bid the suit in response to a transfer or stayman bid first.

I do not distinguish between splinters containing a singleton or void as Harald does. Is this the standard, expert treatment?

It's standard in Norway, also in Sweden and Denmark as far as I know. From what I see here and elsewhere, it's non-standard in most (the rest?) of the world.

[jillybean]

Hi,

I am slowly working my way through all of this and I am stuck on one point. I think most casual partners play ‘old-fashioned’ 1way nmf so the question is

‘should 1♣ 1♠ 1N 2♦ 2N 3♣ be forcing or non forcing?

I can’t picture a hand strong enough to bid nmf but wanting to play 3♣ over 2nt, so I say it has to be forcing.

What do the experts think? Perhaps we should all be playing 2way nmf.

[skjaeran]

jillybean2, on Apr 19 2008, 03:45 AM, said:

Hi,

I am slowly working my way through all of this and I am stuck on one point. I think most casual partners play ‘old-fashioned’ 1way nmf so the question is

‘should 1♣ 1♠ 1N 2♦ 2N 3♣ be forcing or non forcing?

I can’t picture a hand strong enough to bid nmf but wanting to play 3♣ over 2nt, so I say it has to be forcing.

What do the experts think? Perhaps we should all be playing 2way nmf.

This is obviously forcing. With less than invitational strength you'd rebid 2♣, to invite you jump to 3♣ over 1NT.

[jillybean]

skaeran, on Apr 19 2008, 11:44 AM, said:

jillybean2, on Apr 19 2008, 03:45 AM, said:

Hi,

I am slowly working my way through all of this and I am stuck on one point. I think most casual partners play ‘old-fashioned’ 1way nmf so the question is

‘should 1♣ 1♠ 1N 2♦ 2N 3♣ be forcing or non forcing?

I can’t picture a hand strong enough to bid nmf but wanting to play 3♣ over 2nt, so I say it has to be forcing.

What do the experts think?  Perhaps we should all be playing 2way nmf.

This is obviously forcing. With less than invitational strength you'd rebid 2♣, to invite you jump to 3♣ over 1NT.

Great, I have 1yes vote. btw, precious little is obvious to me in this game

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

reformating the auction:

1C - 1S
1NT - 2D
2NT - 3C

forcing, partner could raise clubs with inv. hands.

If he has an inv. hand, with club support and 5 spades,
he should bid 3C, if opener accepts the game try,
opener should bid 3S, which would show 3 spades.

Simply speaking: If responder makes another bid
below game after openers answer to the NMF inquiry,
this creates a game force.

With kind regards
Marlowe