One from Richardson

[Winstonm]

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=sakq42hkq1096dcaq7]133|100|Scoring: IMP

P-P-3N*-?

 

Gambling with nothing outside.

 

If you double, it will proceed:

 

P-P-3N-X

P-P-5D-?

 

Now what?[/hv]

[Blofeld]

How about 4NT over 3NT? Certainly can't be natural :)

[kenrexford]

Not having really thought about this too much, my default agreement with most regular partners is to overcall 3NT as if partner had opened 3NT natural. Hence, 4C would be Stayman (plus transfers). This "stayman" would typically be 5-5, because we are not insane.

 

After partner picks a major (or 4D to make me pick), I have a simple 5C call. This should show 5503 with severe slam interest. Amazingly, I have this.

 

Double, then 5D from RHO, puts a damper on this. So, I bid 6D. I already was stupid and screwed up the hand, so I better at least bid a slam and look daring also.

 

For that matter, many of my bids are daring and stupid.

[mike777]

How about 4NT over 3NT? Certainly can't be natural :)

I like it!

[Winstonm]

Why not Ripstra (better minor for majors) and double as a more balanced takeout?

 

Winston

[pclayton]

Why not Ripstra (better minor for majors) and double as a more balanced takeout?

 

Winston

This is how I play it and this qualifies for a 4♣ call.

[cherdano]

Without agreements, I would double and bid 6♦ over 5♦, and not feel bad about it actually. Unfortunately, partner probably won't be able to bid 7 when that is right (♥A, ♣JT and a fit in one of the majors would be enough...)

 

Arend

[bearmum]

Dealer: West Vul: Both Scoring: IMP

♠ AKQ42 ♥ KQ1096 ♦ [space] ♣ AQ7

P-P-3N*-?   Gambling with nothing outside.   If you double, it will proceed:   P-P-3N-X P-P-5D-?   Now what?

I WON'T X just because it gives opps the way to bid 5 MINOR (and IMHO X does NOT tell P the strength of my hand :) )

 

SO -- assuming NO agreements over a "gambling 3NT " I will bid 4NT --- "saying ---- PICK A MAJOR at the 5 level" partner

 

SO If opps DO "sacrifice" at the 5 minor level Partner should KNOW I have

1. BOTH majors (at LEAST 5/5)

2. Sufficient points to FORCE to the 5 level --- and HE /SHE can make the final decision as to WHAT strain and what level ??

[whereagles]

6♦.

 

Unless pard has exactly zilch, I think I can make a slam here.

[Free]

I WON'T X just because it gives opps the way to bid 5 MINOR (and IMHO X does NOT tell P the strength of my hand :) )

 

SO -- assuming NO agreements over a "gambling 3NT " I will bid 4NT --- "saying ---- PICK A MAJOR at the 5 level" partner

 

SO If opps DO "sacrifice" at the 5 minor level Partner should KNOW I have

1. BOTH majors (at LEAST 5/5)

2. Sufficient points to FORCE to the 5 level --- and HE /SHE can make the final decision as to WHAT strain and what level ??

Why should it show both Majors, and not ♣ and a Major (or even ♦-M or both minors ready to penalize)??? And why should your second Dbl be takeout, not penalty?

 

Without agreements, Dbl is the only decent bid you have, and if opps bid 5♦, then you just bid 6♦ (this shows Majors). Ripstra is clearly a good method for these kind of hands!

 

It seems like we're playing against weird opps, since they don't open 5♦ but they want to bid it in 2nd round. :blink: Get this problem starting with a 5♦ bid, and you'll probably just have to bid 6♦, which is a jump in the dark.

[bearmum]

I WON'T X just because it gives opps the way to bid 5 MINOR (and IMHO X does NOT tell P the strength of my hand  :blink: )

 

SO -- assuming NO agreements over a "gambling  3NT "  I will bid 4NT --- "saying ---- PICK A MAJOR at  the 5 level" partner

 

SO If opps DO "sacrifice" at the 5 minor level Partner should KNOW I have

1. BOTH majors (at LEAST 5/5)

2. Sufficient points to FORCE to the 5 level --- and HE /SHE can make the final decision as to WHAT strain and what level ??

Why should it show both Majors, and not ♣ and a Major (or even ♦-M or both minors ready to penalize)??? And why should your second Dbl be takeout, not penalty?

 

Without agreements, Dbl is the only decent bid you have, and if opps bid 5♦, then you just bid 6♦ (this shows Majors). Ripstra is clearly a good method for these kind of hands!

 

It seems like we're playing against weird opps, since they don't open 5♦ but they want to bid it in 2nd round. :blink: Get this problem starting with a 5♦ bid, and you'll probably just have to bid 6♦, which is a jump in the dark.

OK ----------

 

Ripstra would be good IF an ONLY IF you have an agreement to play it --and in my opinion FEW play it -- so assume it doesn't apply :)

 

with NO agreements I STILL reckon 4NT is asking for majors :blink:

 

 

BTW didn't double FIRST time round :blink: :blink: :blink:--- so HOW you say my SECOND double be "takeout"? ---- I DIDN'T even consider a DOUBLE first time around!!!!!!!!

 

As far as I am concerned if you have to bid 6♦ to show majors you are on a hiding to nothing because 5M could be the right level as I indicated with my original post --- TELLING P I have a good hand with the MAJORS and asking HIM/HER to choose level ------

IF I have to wait wait to Q bid 6♦ I am being totally selfish --- I DON'T have enough to INSIST on slam and by waiting and bidding 6♦ I am telling P -- "I do NOT need your input" - and "I KNOW what is best for us" ----NOT a good way to foster partnership harmony -- NO MATTER what the result on THIS hand :blink:

[Blofeld]

4NT could of course be a minor and a major, but pulling partner's minor to 5♥ should clear the water.

 

Of course if you've discussed what 4♣ and 4♦ mean then that's fine.

[mcphee]

Looks to me like you should bid 4C over 3NT as better minor for major suit t/o. I would then move again taking my chances at the 6 level and if we go down so be it. If over 4C partner bid 4D I would bid to the moon. I do not expect partner to say, you pick I am equal, if they do not have cards. I feel they can't have enough of the values remaining on this hand to make that bid. A of H and K of C should be enough to make 7 but they shouldn't be thinking I am this good and can't bid 4D with that little. Over 4 of a major from partner I think I'd try 6D which should get me to 7 with the A of H and the K of C.

[Free]

Bearmum, perhaps you shouldn't use that many colours and capitals when you asume 4NT shows both majors! 4NT doesn't show BOTH majors, it shows at least 1 (and yes, this is without agreements). If you play with a complete idiot, he might even consider it blackwood! :) I really don't know where you got the impression that 4NT should show both Majors, but plz don't feel so offended if I make a typo (the 'second dbl' crap)...

 

Btw, I just mentioned the efficiency of ripstra on this sort of hands. I don't expect anyone to play this.

[Winstonm]

At the table with no agreements I chose to start with double - this was passed to RHO who then bid 5D, really sticking it to me. I chose to bid 6D and we ended up in a precarious 6S with partner holding Jxx, and we were dependent on a 3/2 spade break.

 

Partner held: Jxx, x, xxx, KJxxxx.

 

Winston

[han]

I agree with double followed by 6♦ Winston, it seems practical. Did the spades split?

 

I have never discussed what to do over 3NT, ripstra sounds great.

[Winstonm]

I agree with double followed by 6♦ Winston, it seems practical. Did the spades split?

 

I have never discussed what to do over 3NT, ripstra sounds great.

We were lucky and the spades split so we chalked up +1430; however, the correct contract is 6C, which is unfindable I think without something like Ripstra; obviously, we hadn't discussed it either but have now, LoL.

 

Winston

[kenrexford]

3NT-4C(Stayman/majors)-P-4S-P-5C-P-6C works.