[AL78]

♠AT92
♥AKJ865
♦652
♣-

MPs playing Acol, weak NT, 3 weak twos in a club mixed pairs competition where the standard is mixed but on average better than normal club sessions.

You open 1♥, partner responds 1♠. What do you do?

[pescetom]

I don't pretend to know "modern Acol", but in other systems I would certainly splinter 4♣ here, whether or not it promises a void.
If partner can manage 4♦ then things look interesting, if not then 4♠ can hardly be wrong.

[nullve]

3♠

[jillybean]

4C sounds right but I dislike using up all that bidding space.

[akwoo]

With 6 losers, I think you're too weak for a splinter (unless you're playing some sort of invitational mini-splinter).

Playing K-S (5 card major weak NT), I'd probably raise only to 2♠, and systemically partner will make a game try on any excuse. (If partner has something like Kxxx x xxxx KJxx - not the worst they could have, we're struggling to make 3♠.) I'd raise to 3♠ in standard 2/1. I don't know Acol well enough to pick between these two bids.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

3S

partner will / should accept a 3S bid with 8+, if he has less you wont make 4S
most of the time.
HCP wise you are min for the bid.


The argument 6 loosers is an argument for making the game invite.
If you force to game, make the splinter.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[shyams]

3 Spades looks right.

[mw64ahw]

I think this is on the cusp of 3/4♠ so would look at a forcing bid rather than one that could be passed immediately

[Tramticket]

3S might be too high (Qxxx x Jxx Kxxxx on a diaamond lead needs you to play trumps for one loser), but it looks the value bid.

If you are going to insist on game, you bid the splinter NOT a raise to 4S (which needs high-card points rather than shape).

[AL78]

I bid 3♠, partner raised to game and we missed a cold slam:

---

Partner said she didn't like the look of her singleton opposite my primary suit, but even then I thought she took an extremely pessimistic view to give up on slam completely. 13 tricks are cold on the layout. I was curious if anyone on here would have splintered on my hand. I didn't think it was quite good enough to force to game with those three losing diamonds so opted for the game invite. I think if I had splintered that would have got us to slam.

[Cyberyeti]

Your partner is ridiculously pessimistic, AQ109, Axxxx, Qx, xx only needs 3 diamonds to stand up to make grand and is nowhere close to 3♠. 4♣ is routine from N over 3♠.

[P_Marlowe]

AL78, on 2023-December-11, 05:39, said:

I bid 3♠, partner raised to game and we missed a cold slam:

---

Partner said she didn't like the look of her singleton opposite my primary suit, but even then I thought she took an extremely pessimistic view to give up on slam completely. 13 tricks are cold on the layout. I was curious if anyone on here would have splintered on my hand. I didn't think it was quite good enough to force to game with those three losing diamonds so opted for the game invite. I think if I had splintered that would have got us to slam.

3S showes 16-18, partner has 15HCP, meaning you are 31-34, you need 33 for the small, and she has the controls,
did I mention she discovered a 9 card fit.
It cannot hurt to at least invite the slam, this would be pessimistic, there is nothing wrong with just blasting,
although 7S may be on, and given she controls all suits, RKCB gets the job done, all KC on board, queen of trumps missing, 6S.

The thing is, if she did not have the Ace of clubs and the King of diamond, would she have passed 3S?
If she would have accepted, why make the same bid with 2 add. sure tricks?

[mw64ahw]

From a modified loser standpoint North should be looking at a potential slam even with a 2♠ rebid
South has 5 modified losers and 3♠ shows ~5.5; 2♠ would show ~7.5
North ha 5.5 modified losers giving 19-5.5 (assumed)-5.5 =8-level! so grand slam potential
A clear case of miss-valuation

[pescetom]

AL78, on 2023-December-11, 05:39, said:

I was curious if anyone on here would have splintered on my hand.

I said I would

It would probably have gone:
1♥ 1♠
4♣ 4♦
4♥ 5♣
5♥ 5NT
6♠ P
South knows that we have all controls and his third diamond will go on the ♣A, but he stops in 6♠ knowing the hearts situation and ♠Q missing.

akwoo, on 2023-December-10, 19:38, said:

With 6 losers, I think you're too weak for a splinter (unless you're playing some sort of invitational mini-splinter).

Surely that depends to a large extent upon your splinter style. Our splinters by Responder are really borderline, technically not even game forcing. A splinter by Opener needs more, but this hand is still ok despite (because of) the diamond losers. We have other ways of showing slam interest or a stronger raise.

[AL78]

pescetom, on 2023-December-11, 10:47, said:

I said I would

It would probably have gone:
1♥ 1♠
4♣ 4♦
4♥ 5♣
5♥ 5NT
6♠ P
South knows that we have all controls and his third diamond will go on the ♣A, but he stops in 6♠ knowing the hearts situation and ♠Q missing.



Surely that depends to a large extent upon your splinter style. Our splinters by Responder are really borderline, technically not even game forcing. A splinter by Opener needs more, but this hand is still ok despite (because of) the diamond losers. We have other ways of showing slam interest or a stronger raise.

Surely a splinter must be game forcing if it is taking you beyond game invitational level as 4♣ does here?

[pescetom]

AL78, on 2023-December-11, 11:48, said:

Surely a splinter must be game forcing if it is taking you beyond game invitational level as 4♣ does here?

Technically our splinter is not game forcing. Yes partner usually has no choice but to bid game, but in a contested auction we might stop below game:
1♠ (P) 4♣ (4♥); P (P) P.
I guess he might also choose to pass an artificial splinter which nominates NT or his second suit.

More concretely, it does not invite to anything, but it pinpoints distribution and if partner is excited about the fit then it provides a useful opportunity to start control-bidding below game.

[At a pinch, Responder could splinter with a stronger hand, ready to bid on over 4M. But then it's usually possible and better to take things slowly and exploit the space, as Jillybean would prefer]

[Gilithin]

AL78, on 2023-December-11, 05:39, said:

I bid 3♠, partner raised to game and we missed a cold slam:

Partner said she didn't like the look of her singleton opposite my primary suit, but even then I thought she took an extremely pessimistic view to give up on slam completely.

So was the point of the thread to shame partner or just to win the argument? Even if you evaluate the singleton as worthless, which is already pessimistic, the hand is still worth a slam try with solid, hard values and an extra trump.

[johnu]

AL78, on 2023-December-11, 05:39, said:

I bid 3♠, partner raised to game and we missed a cold slam:

Courageous bid by partner to raise to game. 4♠ could have no play.

[akwoo]

With the North hand, to refuse to look for slam opposite even a 2♠ raise is unduly pessimistic - partner could have AQxx Axxxx Qxx x - 12 hcp, and there are numerous possibilities for 13 tricks, not just 12.

If slam is cold opposite the perfect minimum, you should at least invite it. Of course, this requires the skill to picture possible perfect minimums for partner that will make slam - a skill most club players don't have (but should try to learn).