[kenberg]

 Phil, on 2014-May-14, 04:42, said:

Definitely prefer this as a transfer to 3N but that might not be I/A stuff except for JillyBean

This attitude surfaces from time to time. mikeh on a different thread took someone to task for posting something on I/A that he thought would be beyond us. At the risk of appearing over-sensitive, I wish to respond.

"Not expert" does not equate to "stupid". I am sure that I can follow an explanation of how to use 3♠ as a transfer. I might decide to use it, I might decide not to, but I am positive I could follow the explanation. For me, the main limitation is that I do not have a regular partnership that is committed to extensive partnership agreements. This can be an issue at any level, including expert and even world class. For example: 1♥-(2♠)-4♣. Without the interference this is a splinter for virtually all Advanced players and almost all Intermediates (I play with quite a few Intermediates, trust me on this). With the interference? I think even expert opinion varies. Or maybe not. But I would be less certain how a partner intended it. I generally like to arrange agreements so that we can cover a lot of cases w/o a lot of discussion. For example, in an uncontested auction, I like all second round jumps to the three level by responder to be invitational, at least as the default. A list of exceptions is possible. So, w/o further discussion, 1♣-1♠-1NT=3♥ is invitational, the forcing hand goes through 2♦ before the 3♥ bid. I have no idea if this is best, but it falls into the scheme of second round jumps by responder being invitational so it does not require a separate discussion. Back to the OP. I would play, undiscussed, that 3♠ is a splinter. It's a splinter w/o the interference and. w/o disucssion, it's a splinter with the interference. This is not because I am Advanced rather than Expert, it is because with my limited commitment to the game I go with simplicity.

But if someone writes an argument about the merits of using 3♠ as a transfer to NT and it seems right, I do have partners who might well be willing to play that way. I really don't see that it matters whether they are Advanced or Expert.

[Phil]

Hi Ken-

Think of MikeH as a concerned parent and an inverted 2♣ rebid as donuts. It's fun to learn (eat) this convention (food) but the long term effects are mostly negative.

I'm sure there are a lot of really neat methods that don't find their way into the I/A arena. However, this forum seems to be focused on player development and too many newer players concentrate way too much on gizmos and gadgets long before mastering the basics.

It's a perfectly appropriate 'attitude' for a player like MikeH to help police content in these areas. This isn't about treating players 'stupidly', it's about helping to reverse a trend of bridge teachers making a living by teaching a lot of nonsense before someone is ready for it.

[kenberg]

I mostly take comments with that view, or, as I like to think of it, I shouldn't take offense when no offense was intended. There have been a series of events lately that individually I shrug off but collectively started to agitate me. Anyway, enough with that and so movin' on:

It would seem to me that after an auction begins 1♥-(1♠) there is a significant possibility that opener's side might have to decide what to do after the opponent's, sooner or later, bid 4♠. With that in mind it appears that 3♠ as a splinter might be even more useful here than it would be in a non-competitive auction. At least there must be a trade-off, no?

The OP asked for the meaning of 3♠, I fully expect he is aware of the splinter meaning w/o the interference so I take the question to be either "What do you think is best?" or else "What would you expect if this is undiscussed?". I really think the answer to the second is that it's a splinter. This might depend on level but I am not so sure. Imagine you are called in at the last moment to replace someone in a high level game. Maybe you replace Jeff Meckstroth and while both you and Rodwell can play a big club, it takes considerable discussion (unless you know their system or he knows yours) to avoid disaster so you decide to play 2/1 and hope for the best. This auction comes up. You would know how Rodwell intends it? You are sure?

As to which is best, I have an open mind (so I claim) but splinter sounds good to me.

I like your donut analogy.