[nige1]

 the hog, on 2014-October-11, 18:44, said:

This hand was posted on another forum and the discussion was varied and got quite divisive. I am interested in opinions here. The pun in the title was intentional before anyone comments. All red Pd opens 1♠ (x) You hold ♠ K x x x x x x ♥ A x ♦ x x x ♣ x

IMO 4♠ = 10, 4♣ = 9, 2♠ = 6, 2♣ = 5. IMO walking the dog is a doubtful tactic because: opponents are vulnerable. 4♠ might win the auction, immediately, without palaver; 4♣ is also worth consideration because consulting with partner is often more effective than leaving lots of room for opponents to consult each other.

[ahydra]

I must admit 4S was my instinct as well but I then read the comments and was intrigued at the idea of a 2C or 2D psyche. Opps may well make 5C, or may not, so either has its appeal, but I think I would go with the simple 4S so as to keep things easy for partner if he has extras. Looking forward to the full story!

ahydra

[aguahombre]

I cannot imagine how 4S makes it easy for partner if she has extras. 4S is meant to silence a partner with extras.

Splinters in and of themselves are not treated as slam tries, commonly. They are descriptive bids within an allegedly narrow range, allowing PARTNER to make slam tries. So, both 4S and a splinter feel wrong here. This 7-count is worth a mild slam try opposite a 1S opening, IMO. Maybe the badguys will compete; oh, well. Even with some "psych" type game-force, we have established an unlimited game force.

[whereagles]

I really doubt our side can have a slam here... we'd need a very well-fitting hand across. As it stands, I see an extremely likely diamond loser, and both hearts and clubs are complete mysteries as to whether or not we'll have losers there.

4? sure, bid at least this.
5? probably makes as well.
6? not likely unless pard has a very good hand and LHO is completely broke.

[Cascade]

 aguahombre, on 2014-October-12, 02:13, said:

Likewise, I think we want information and am not sure how to go about it; but, by "go low" I assume you mean slow down --- certainly not devalue.

Agree with Mr. Hog that Splintering and intending to keep bidding afterward is bad policy, and that a direct 4S is just plain wrong.

2/1 2♦ will probably get ugly whether the opponents compete or not.

We have a FNT followed by 4S to show a "mixed" raise with long spades; but that doesn't feel right with a 7-fit, a bullet, and a shortness either. If this were one of those Bridgewinners bidding polls, I would just hit "skip". Partner would not be amused if I tried that at the table, so 2D it is -- I am not going to get the information necessary, but it should be interesting from there.

Definitely not devalue. Although not sure what I am devaluing compared with. I am certainly not thinking I have only 7 hcp and some spade support here.

I think 4♠ is wrong. It forces them to guess now but me to guess again on the subsequent round(s).

[aguahombre]

 Cascade, on 2014-October-13, 13:33, said:

I think 4♠ is wrong. It forces them to guess now but me to guess again on the subsequent round(s).

Yes, and so does 4C, IMO. I really don't like splintering and then not being satisfied.

[Cascade]

 aguahombre, on 2014-October-13, 16:13, said:

Yes, and so does 4C, IMO. I really don't like splintering and then not being satisfied.

Agree.

I would be happier with a 3♣ splinter if available. Sort of half way bid that gives some information and gives some room for the opponents (and partner) to provide you with more information.

[rhm]

 aguahombre, on 2014-October-13, 16:13, said:

Yes, and so does 4C, IMO. I really don't like splintering and then not being satisfied.

I do not understand all this whining about the splinter. You have to find a bid.
Nobody said the splinter is perfect, but it does tell something about your hand and allows partner to value his hand.
If 4♣ is an overbid, 4♠ is at least as much of an underbid. I would say more.
As to the other suggestions like 2♣ followed by 4♠, they misdescribe and show HCP strength you really do not have.

Rainer Herrmann

[aguahombre]

 rhm, on 2014-October-14, 05:23, said:

I do not understand all this whining about the splinter. You have to find a bid.
Nobody said the splinter is perfect, but it does tell something about your hand and allows partner to value his hand.
If 4♣ is an overbid, 4♠ is at least as much of an underbid. I would say more.
As to the other suggestions like 2♣ followed by 4♠, they misdescribe and show HCP strength you really do not have.

Rainer Herrmann

If you mean objection to the splinter=whining, o.k. 4C is not an overbid ---it is an underbid, IMO, and it is not useful in describing the slam potential. I don't know whether we can find slam opposite AJXXX XXXX X AKX or not with the path I pick as responder; but I know we won't sniff it with a splinter.

If you want real whining: I bemoan that plain old J2N with suck shortness continuations would work opposite the above magic opener, and we don't have that ---and/or probably wouldn't have perpetrated J2N if we did.

[helene_t]

If we are going to psyche anyway, what about redouble? LHO may be too strong to do anything but a forcing pass. 2♣ is cute but opps may belong in 5♥ or 6♥.

But I think I just bid 4♠.

[Vampyr]

 mike777, on 2014-October-11, 20:51, said:

Bergen raises are pretty common. If we play them

Over a double? Does anyone do this?

[ahydra]

I'd be rather surprised if the opps can make 6H with partner having an opening bid and us having the ace of trumps. 5H, maybe, but I didn't plan to sell out to that...

ahydra

[PhilKing]

I misread this one partly due to the formatting of the auciton (I did not see the double).

My preferred curve ball is 3♣ (fit jump), which will make any further bids from me appear plausible. Let them unravel that one.

Footnote - I would not do this against recreational players on a club night.

[aguahombre]

 Vampyr, on 2014-October-14, 07:45, said:

Over a double? Does anyone do this?

Yeh, some do. A lot use fit jumps over the double. We have the 3C mini-splinter, but that seems less helpful than a full splinter here.

[whereagles]

 helene_t, on 2014-October-14, 07:40, said:

If we are going to psyche anyway, what about redouble?

good catch. i had forgotten that one.

however, it's not REALLY a psyche... I can hardly fathom going down in 1♠XX

[aguahombre]

 helene_t, on 2014-October-14, 07:40, said:

If we are going to psyche anyway, what about redouble?

This is really intriguing, within our xfer structure over 1MX. Redouble of 1♠X=any semi-notrumpish 6+ OR a G.F. with a long suit --presumably other than Spades.

So, redouble would be a psych of sorts, but our suit-bid continuations would at least be game forcing.
I like it. If it goes 4H P P back to me, partner might even pick up on the joke when I now bid 4S.

[NickRW]

We're all assuming that p has no history of psyching?!?

[aguahombre]

 NickRW, on 2014-October-15, 04:50, said:

We're all assuming that p has no history of psyching?!?

Well, I would assume at Red in first seat partner's 1S opening was not a psych even if the clown does have a history of psyching.

[NickRW]

 aguahombre, on 2014-October-15, 08:33, said:

Well, I would assume at Red in first seat partner's 1S opening was not a psych even if the clown does have a history of psyching.

Well, quite. However, some of the more odd ball recommendations in this thread (that I admit have a lot of attraction) possibly won't go down well with the director if p has been the "clown" type, as we're going to look like we've fielded it.

Anyway I'm a simple soul, so put me down some large number of spades, like 5 maybe unless I'm having a chicken day.

[SteveMoe]

Agree ♣ splinter inadequate (want 3 control cards - have only two).

Might be quite interesting to try 2N Jordan here. We are going to 4♠, but the side Ace makes a direct jump to 4♠ seem wrong. Partner might just have enough to set them or make slam. Can we find out?

Why not ask partner for shortness instead? (I play Jacoby style responses to Jordan). If partner happens to bid 3♦, well then...