How is 4C ambiguous? Even if it's undiscussed, if you ever discussed splinters in any auction with partner and he has a clue about basic bidding principles, there is no doubt what it means.

3C would be forcing. Therefore, 4C means something else. There would be no earthly reason to use 4C as a natural jump shift in auctions like these, mostly because it's just bad if you need a reason, notice that this and too many similar auctions get too high to reach the optimal contract some of the time.

Taking the 3H; 3S - 4C line implies stuff where you don't have it and denies it where you do. Partner is control bidding 4D, and you are getting to slam, when he holds AJxxxx xx x AQxx and signing off in 4S with AJxxx x QJTx Axx, and it will be wrong in each case. Meanwhile, when he jumps to 4S with a decent hand and a heart void, you can avoid a bad slam but can you give up on a grand when he might have either AJTxxx -- Axxx AQJ, or the same hand with the minors switched, and you have no way to tell the difference? (And are you sure he won't make that jump with long, topless spades?)

If partner really may take 4C wrong, you're kind of screwed, but the advantages of playing splinters here should cause many (most?) partners whth whom you play them in ohter auctions to reason that that must be what you meant.

Atak,

4C is obvious here, but I definitely play (socially) with some people who would not be sure if that was a splinter. If your partner sucks, or if your partner plays with few or no conventions, you'll have trouble some of the time with 4C here.

With one of my better partners, I have the agreement that jumps by passed hands or in competition are fit. Here is where that can screw us. I'll bid 3H with him, though we'll be discussing exactly this auction later today.

Fit jumps in competition aren't a bad agreement to have, even if they don't happen to serve well on this particular hand. But observe that there would be negative inferences available if playing them, so 3H; 3s - 4C now cannot show a slam-interested spade hand with good clubs. (Unfortunately it's not completely clear that it shows a primary spade fit, but that's another issue.) It won't solve all problems, but with that partner some auctions will e easier than with the ones with whom you have no agreements at all regarding conventional jumps in these auctions.

Not much new to add here: yes, it's too good of a hand to NOT bid slam, unless you can name the two losing tricks. If you play splinters here, use them - though I, somewhat reluctantly, use fit-jumps here, and am forced to start with 3H.

Yeah, sorry I didn't elucidate, I was playing with a relatively new player, who is good at card-play but hasn't had much experience with bidding. I specifically asked him about about splinters, and he said he didn't know what they were. Otherwise 4C is definitely the way to go.

If I can't splinter, is the 3H cuebid the unanimous way to attack this?

Probably.

With a partner who's truly a bad bidder, I might just check on aces and hope for the best, lest I get dropped in a club contract along the way (or something equally silly).

Yeah, should have thought of that.

"But partner, why'd you bid hearts if you didn't want to play in them?"

With a completely nonscientific partner... the direct jump to 6S is a close second to the 3H bid, and may well be better if you don't expect to learn anything useful from partner's reply to 3H.

So if you last 6S (or otherwise get there without learning much), and LHO puts in a Lightner double, anyone trying 6NT? Could be ridiculously bad, but could also be the only chance.

I think I might if I have not splintered, particularly if I have asked for aces and learned that we're missing one, because now 6S is doomed and they will often lead wrong against 6NT even when it can be beaten.

k, i wouldn't mind reading another book about the play, i have the watson book already, am ideally looking for something that's not ridiculously basic but not hugely specialised into one area of play such as squeezes, end plays etc. ideally in some sort of "test yourself" format kind of like HOH3 but not for donkaments. ideas?

If you want quiz books:

The old standby here is Eddie Kantar's Test Your Bridge Play, two volumes of 100 problems each. Among the many more recent quiz books, one I particualrly enjoy is Danny Roth's How Good is Your Bridge?.

For books to improve declarer play:

One of my standard recommendations is easy to find -- Mike Lawrence's How to Read the Opponents' Cards -- and two are hard: Fred Karpin's The Drawing of Trumps and its Postponement and Hugh Kelsey's Countdown to Better Bridge. The Karpin is the easiest of the three, about planning the play in general; the other two emphasize the one really big non-basic declarer skill, figuring out which opponent has what cards, which is really a pre-requisite to having much success at squeezes.

No pressure of course, but I have all of the above except for the Kelsey, and a number of others, if you haven't decided where to buy.

R/R IMPs

Q J 7 6
T 8 7 4
K T 9 8
7

Partner deals and opens 1. RHO passes. Is this too weak for 3?

What is 3H?

Assuming limit raise, you do have 8 losers, but I think it's still a bit weak. Playing Bergen I'd use the 7-10 bid. Playing Standard, 2H, and accept any invitation except 3C (1H-2H-3C presumably indicating a distaste on opener's part for help in spades)

Incidentally, I am quite fond of a homegrown extension of Bergen: 1H-2S shows 7-10, 4 card support, and promises a singleton (2NT asks where) while 1H-3C shows 7-10, 4 card support, and a denies a singleton.

2H is a standout over other options playing standard imo.

I basically agree with Siegmund about accepting most invites, but I think I'd make a counter-try of 3D over 3C; that T98 of diamonds is just too hard to resist.

myr's hand looks like an obvious 2h, too weak for 3h imo. might venture three with another queen somewhere

Even though it's only 6 hcp, I think it's distributionally very strong. Honestly, it has at least as much playing strength as:

xxx Qxx Kxxx Axx, which is going to accept a game invitation after bidding 2. Vulnerable, I might be overstretching my hand though, since partner is more likely to accept.

r/r

Qxxx/9xxx/xx/xxx

1H-(P)-??

3H is a limit raise with this partner. Is this a "2H wtp?"

I'd first think who has the high cards? Second hand has at most about a
dozen high-card without an overcall or takeout double, partner has at least
about a dozen, so fourth seat could have anywhere from a "balancing hand"
to a "monster". If fourth seat doesn't balance, second seat could have a
lot of high cards, so it's very unlikely you have a heart game. It's also not
very likely the opponents have some sort of game either (and good to have
four spades so opponents are not likely to have the "boss suit").

Sure, it's four-card support, but a ten-loser hand and one can show
support later. I'd pass and support hearts later (the "law-abiders" will be
able to support up to the three-level); of course, everybody will know your
hand is an "open book", but it's likely this hand will be dummy anyway. A
raise to two hearts has some merit since it is somewhat preemptive, but
misrepresents the "value" of your hand; however, if you played Bergen (or
similar raises), this is a normal preempt to 3.

ACK!!!

I'm sorry! The auction was
(P)-P-(P)-1H
(P)-???

EDIT: and yes, with my most regular partner, this is 3H, and I really wish I had this bid available.

I'd pass on both auctions. Other than the 4-card support your hand is awful and partner is probably planning to enthusiastically land you in 4H. There's also less need to be preemptive when holding 4 spades.

Is it bad to pass here, and support after your LHO balances? Then you show that you have 0-5 points, but at least 3 card heart support with distrbution.

Only if you consider
(2D) - P - (3H) - P
(5D) - AP

for -600 "bad".



Over 2H, partner will make a game try, and we'll stop in 3H, which makes on like a 25% line.

Maybe I'm being too results oriented here, but this was a horrible board for us, as at our partners' table, the auction went 1H-3H-AP.

If your system doesn't include a weak raise, pass-then-support is really your only option. Raising to 2H immediately on a flat 10-loser hand is a great recipe to go down in a lot of games the rest of the field doesn't attempt, when partner plays you for a normal raise...

Recently finished this one, and will be rereading it often.

Watson was just SO boring I couldn't finish it.