Breaking Transfers

Bidding 3 of a Suit in Response to an Opening 1NT [12-14]

Overview

My system cards have for some years airily characterised a 3-of-a-suit response to an opening weak no trump as a slam try.

But when I came to producing a seminar on these bids, and in particular on subsequent continuations in the auction, I was led to the view that 3-level bids were on the one hand not really needed for this purpose, and on the other hand could be more usefully employed in other ways.

So I've adopted Splinter Responses to an opening 1NT, whereby 3-of-a-suit bid shows shortage [singleton or void] in the suit bid, and is game-forcing.

The objective is to steer opener towards what is hopefully the best contract, and at the same time steering him or her away what could turn out to be a daft contract, e.g. 3NT with Qx opposite x.

Obviously we would not want to use one of these 3-level bids if there were an existing bidding mechanism available to deal with the hand. So, for example, if responder were to hold a 5-card or longer major, he or she would use a transfer in the normal manner. And this leads us onto what responder might have for the bid:

strength-wise he/she will be 12+ in HCP
there will be at most a singleton in the bid suit
there will be at least three cards in any unbid major: if the bid suit is a minor, the majors will be at least 4-3.
responder will not hold a 5-card or longer major
this bid is asking the 1NT opener to set the suit and possibly the contract. Sometimes, opener will have a good holding in responder's short suit, good enough to plump for 3NT. If opener chooses to bid a suit though, this is to all intents and purposes picking the denomination for the final contract.

So, where might we finish up after employing this bid?

opener might select 3NT as the most likely spot, and responder must respect that choice. This would typically deny a 4-card or longer suit elsewhere, and obviously guarantees that opener can deal with the suit without any help from responder.
if alternatively opener bids a suit, that's the suit we are going to play in. Bids from hereon in by responder are constructive, but not suit-changing.
it's not at all unlikely that we will end up playing in a major-suit contract on a 4-3 fit. This os ok as It's responder who will have the 3-card suit to go with his/her singleton/void.
if opener has a choice of suits to bid, e.g. two 4-card suits of which one is a major [and not responder's shortage!], he/she will invariably rebid in that suit.
because the splinter response is game-forcing, a 4-level major-suit rebid from opener is weaker than the 3-level alternative.

Let's take a look at responder's possible hand shapes:

if he/she bids 3♣, the shape could be 4-4-5-0, 4-4-4-1, 4-3-6-0, 3-4-6-0, 4-3-5-1, 3-4-5-1. Even 3-3-6-1 at a pinch.
if the bid is 3♦, we're simply reversing the minor-suit holdings
if he/she bid 3♥, the shape could be 3-0-5-5, 3-1-5-4, 3-1-4-5, 4-0-4-5, 4-0-5-4
and similarly for 3♠.

4-Level Suit Responses

We already have 4♣/♦ as Minorwood and, to ensure responder can undertake a slam exploration in a major suit as well, 4♥/♠ similarly become RKCB in the bid suit.

Note that responder also has the possibility of transferring to a major and following this up with 4NT. This is not ace-asking, it's quantitative. In fact, this is about the only time thata 4NT quantitative bid would be made, as responder has 2♠ available as a quantitative bid without getting stratospheric. If responder bids 2♠ and then continues bidding after opener's rebid of either 2NT or 3♣, this is absolutely game-forcing. Opener should not now simply bid 3NT unless he/she has nothing else worthwhile to say.