Non Serious 3N vs Serious 3N

[joshs]

Non-Serious 3N is a better treatment than Serious 3N for (you guessed it) 3 reasons:

Lets suppose we had the following auction in 2/1:

1S-2H-2S-3S (but the issues are the same when-ever you just agreed a major at the 3 level)

 

A. (Most Important) If you are not interested in Slam, and Neither is Partner, you do not want to help the opponents with an opening lead by cuebidding in a minor. This is a major issue, especially at MPs, but even at IMPS. Playing Serious 3N the auction might go: 1S-2H-2S-3S-4D(not serious)-4S and they lead a club....

Playing Not Serious it Goes: 1S-2H-2S-3S-3N(Not a great hand, but not hopeless for slam either)-4S and they have no idea which minor to lead.

 

B. (Less Important) The auction Tempos Better playing Non-Serious 3N, since its more likely that the good hand will be able to Q-bid 4C than the bad hand, saving you room for more 4 level Q-bidding

 

C. (Least Important) If you have an accident and your partnership has a misunderstanding about whether 3N is Serious or not, passing it is less of a disaster when it was non-serious, since, at least, you are not missing slam, and your side is less likely to be control rich and more likely to have the Q's and J's that make 3N a reasonable alternative contract to 4M. Although, its probably not your best contract in either case.

 

 

Anyway, thats my 3 bits. :P

[pclayton]

Josh: The 3rd point has come up with us once or twice, and I think its more important than what you make it out to be. 1 and 2 are obviously important as well.

 

I would also add that Non-Serious 3♠ is a sensible add on as well.

[joshs]

Josh: The 3rd point has come up with us once or twice, and I think its more important than what you make it out to be. 1 and 2 are obviously important as well.

 

I would also add that Non-Serious 3♠ is a sensible add on as well.

Phil, you are suppossed to say "My partnerships are so well oiled that we never have such a misunderstanding." :)

 

 

Anyway, I started playing Serious 3N about 8 years ago after reading Fred's terrific articles "Improving 2/1 Game Force". After about a year of "making slams after I bid them but going down in game when they found the right lead" I switched to non-serious 3N, and have loved it ever since....

[joshs]

Josh: The 3rd point has come up with us once or twice, and I think its more important than what you make it out to be. 1 and 2 are obviously important as well.

 

I would also add that Non-Serious 3♠ is a sensible add on as well.

BTW, there are pluses and minuses to Non-Serious 3S (switching the meaning of 3S and 3N when hearts are trumps)

 

On the plus side:

You don't have to tell them about spade controls if neither player is interested in slam.

 

On the Minus Side:

They can x or not x 3S (where you might not have any values). This sometimes lets them find a 4S/4H sac (much more costly than letting them find a 5 level sac over 4M). This sometimes also helps them with the lead.

Also, when partner bids 3N (serious slam try with a spade control) and you forget and pass, thats bad...

Finally, when both hearts and spades have been bid, these auctions get even more confusing: 1S-2H-3H-3S. This is an auction worth discussing in everyone's regular partnerships, is it a double fit, or is it a Q-bid for hearts? If its a double fit, how do you work out later which major is trumps? E.g. Can all bids in either major be passed after this start?

 

Overall, I think the pluses and minus's break even, so I have never bothered with this add-on, but I can be convinced that I am wrong...

[MickyB]

I'm not sure about point 2, Josh - a 4♣ cue may leave more room for cuebidding, but a 4♦ cue is more descriptive.

[joshs]

I'm not sure about point 2, Josh - a 4♣ cue may leave more room for cuebidding, but a 4♦ cue is more descriptive.

Well lets say, you play italian stlye cue-bidding and the last train.

 

The auction, goes:

 

1S-2H-2S-3S-4C-4D-?

Now 4H is an expression of extra values. The heart control is not known.

 

While, 1S-2H-2S-3S-4D-?

Now 4H is just possession of a club control, and is completely nebulous about extra values or a heart control. E.g. This bid is much more nebulous than the 4H bid in the sequence above, since you need to find out 2 things for slam (extra values and a missing control, as oppossed to only needing to find out 1 more thing in the above sequence)

 

Or lets say you play old fashioned, ace's before kings:

1S-2H-2S-3S-4C(non-serious)-4D(serious)-4H-4S(we have all the suits under control, but I am a min for this bidding)

 

As Oppossed to:

1S-2H-2S-3S-4D(non-serious)-4H(serious)-?

Aren't you obligated to show the club A here with moderate extras?

You end up at the 5 level more often, or end up guessing more often when the first Q-bid is diamonds instead of clubs. Now if You are not really Q-bidding but describing your hand in another way, and 4D was a better description of your hand than 4C, then thats another matter.

 

The main point is: The stronger hand has more slammish features to show than the weaker hand, so it uses space more efficiently if the weaker hand leaves the stronger hand space to show those features. If you play asking bids (or relay style) instead of showing stuff co-operatively with Qbids, its the other way around, the stronger hand should be asking since the other hand has less features to show and thus having the weaker hand show saves space....

 

This is also why I feel that in 2/1 1M-2Y-3Z should show serious extra values (or a concentrated 5-5 hand and some extras), with a min, save space and rebid 2M so the slammish hand can show its features, since the stronger hand likely has more features to show.

[han]

Serious 3NT works off course well when the good hand wants to know if partner can cuebid clubs.

[joshs]

Serious 3NT works off course well when the good hand wants to know if partner can cuebid clubs.

Yes. In fact, some people play the following convention:

 

After a suit agreement, 3N is a slam try , that wants to know if partner can q-bid clubs. It doesn't show a hand stronger or weaker than a direct q-bid, just a hand that cares very much if partner can Q-bid clubs.

 

My point was merely that if you had to guess which player can q-bid clubs, and you had no other reason to pick between serious and non-serious 3N, its more likely that the stronger hand can q-bid clubs, so its slightly better to play non-serious 3N so that the first q-bid is by the stronger hand, and not the weaker hand (and thus its more likely, in an auction that has the partnership considering slam, that the first cue-bid is clubs when playing non-serious 3N then when playing serious 3N).

 

Note: There are many possible other uses for 3N and 4 level bids. For instance in the auction, 1S-2H-3C(extras)-3S one might play that 4 level bids are natural, but show a min for the previous bidding, and 3N is serious.

Thus, 1S-2H-3C-3S-4D shows approximently a 5134 15-16 count.

And, 1S-2H-3C-3S-4H shows approximently a 5314 15-16 count and is NOT forcing.

Etc.

 

This treatment is most tempting when done by a hand that has already made 2 natural bids, and is now completing his shape.

[Trinidad]

I'm not sure about point 2, Josh - a 4♣ cue may leave more room for cuebidding, but a 4♦ cue is more descriptive.

Well lets say, you play italian stlye cue-bidding and the last train.

 

The auction, goes:

 

1S-2H-2S-3S-4C-4D-?

Now 4H is an expression of extra values. The heart control is not known.

I think that using serious/non serious 3NT in combination with a last train cuebid is overdoing things a little bit.

 

In the old days, we would cuebid and cue past 4M if we had extra values. Then we invented last train. We could show more interest without passing 4M. But we couldn't promise a control anymore. Then we came up with serious/non serious 3NT and we could show interest AND show our control in the last suit below 4M again. But if we combine serious/non serious 3NT with last train, we throw that advantage away while getting only something marginal back ("Given that I did not have extra values (non serious), I have extra values (last train)" or something like that).

 

I would play 1 of 2:

 

I) serious/non serious 3NT and natural cuebids.

 

II) 3NT as inconvenient cuebid and last train

In that case 3NT is a cuebid in the last train suit (and 4♣ denies a control in that suit). This treatment has all the drawbacks that you described for serious 3NT. But it has the advantage that you only need to decide whether you have extra values after you heard partner's cuebids instead of before. As an example, your hand gets a lot better when your partner can't cue the suit where you have a singleton or void.

 

I would choose I or II, but not both.

 

Rik

[Flame]

If i remember corectly fred imself admited that non serious is better but he still play serious because he is more used to it and the different isnt big enough for him to change.

[Chamaco]

I think that using serious/non serious 3NT in combination with a last train cuebid is overdoing things a little bit.

In most situations, Last Train is nothing but a "squeeze cuebid" to checkback for a control that could not be verified previously.

This is perfectly compatible with serious/unserious 3NT.

 

On few other occasions, Last Train is the only chance for opener/responder to show extras without bypassing 4M.

 

Thus, the combination of seious NT + LTTC is not necessarily redundant, IMO.

 

The above approach relies on the principle that cuebidding above 4M is not to be recommended (see Fred's article).

This of course is not to everyone's taste.

 

However, I do feel that if a partnership is to use cuebidding above 4M, then it seems to me that it is better to drop altogether RKCB + serious NT + Last Train, and adopt 3NT Turbo, followed by natural cuebid.

[Codo]

Lets suppose we had the following auction in 2/1:

1S-2H-2S-3S (but the issues are the same when-ever you just agreed a major at the 3 level)

 

A. (Most Important) If you are not interested in Slam, and Neither is Partner, you do not want to help the opponents with an opening lead by cuebidding in a minor. This is a major issue, especially at MPs, but even at IMPS. Playing Serious 3N the auction might go: 1S-2H-2S-3S-4D(not serious)-4S and they lead a club....

 

This must not at all be a problem. 4 Spade did not deny a Club Cotrol, it just did deny sufficent extras to go for a slam.

 

 

B. (Less Important) The auction Tempos Better playing Non-Serious 3N, since its more likely that the good hand will be able to Q-bid 4C than the bad hand, saving you room for more 4 level Q-bidding.

 

Agreed, but as the responder is tabling his hand as dummy, it is much nicer to hear a feature from his hand instead of showing the values of the opener. Maybe his control is the only thing we need?

 

C. (Least Important) If you have an accident and your partnership has a misunderstanding about whether 3N is Serious or not, passing it is less of a disaster when it was non-serious, since, at least, you are not missing slam, and your side is less likely to be control rich and more likely to have the Q's and J's that make 3N a reasonable alternative contract to 4M. Although, its probably not your best contract in either case.

 

This is a real good and import point. EWspecially at match points, it could be very nice to stop at 3 NT despite a fit.

[Chamaco]

This is a real good and import point. EWspecially at match points, it could be very nice to stop at 3 NT despite a fit.

A good compromise - based on common sense, and that does not require too much memory strain - is the following meta-agreement, used by some top level Italian League players.

 

"3NT is artificial when there is an explicit 9+ card fit in the major. In case of an 8 card fit, 3NT is to play".

 

This argument is generally used for "Turbo" 3NT, but IMO it can be used also for serious/nonserious 3NT