Winstonm Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 I saw that Zia uses 3N as the non-serious slam try acceptance type hand, and that made sense. But I cannot figure out what happens to the 3S cue bid in a heart auction - does 3S become the serious 3N bid and 3N the spade cue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Tu Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 3S becomes the "non-serious" aka "frivolous flag", 3nt=spade cue. Alternately, one could play as described in Fred Gitelman's serious 3nt article & have 3s=spades & not say anything about serious/non-serious. That never made sense to me though ... If I were playing "serious 3nt", when hearts were agreed I'd use "serious 3S". Just as I use "frivolous 3S". I don't see any advantages in playing the other way, can anyone show me otherwise? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 I tried serious 3NT for a while and then switched to frivilous 3NT. From there we moved to frivilous 3♠ when we have heart agreement with 3NT being a spade cue-bid. This was relatively easy for us to get used to since we play kickback therefore in RKCB auctions 4♠ is RKCB and 4NT is a spade cue. This has worked very well for us. A big advantage of frivilous is that when partner doesn't have slam interest we have not given much information to the opponents. "Frivilous" is context dependent. By an unlimited hand a "serious" cue for us would be almost underwriting slam unless we find too many controls missing. By a limited hand a "serious" cue would just show a maximum. The main disadvantages of these methods as I see them are: 1. We cannot play 3NT which I am fond of with the right hands in spite of a major suit fit; 2. With "frivilous" 3♠ especially you give the opponents a free double for a lead or perhaps more costly for a suggestion of a sacrifice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfgauss Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 One could (and many do) play as you describe (3S = non-serious, 3N = spade cue). I play 3S = spade cue (serious or not), 3N = non-serious (denies spade cue). The two are reasonably equivalent in any case, and mostly it's done for ease (I don't tend to play 4S = kickback with hearts agreed either). Like playing kickback, playing non-serious 3S requires extra discussion. For example, what are 3S & 3N on the auction 1S-2H;3H-? (I'd want 3N non-serious and 3S natural even if I played non-serious 3S usually)? Andy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 One question regarding non-serious 3NT, or non-serious 3S, has lurked in my mind without resolution. Perhaps advocates of the non-serious school can explain this. The benefit I most often see to Serious 3NT is in the concept of having the person with the weaker hand explain himself for the person with the stronger hand. Thus, if I am on the verge of RKCB, needing only one more bit of info, I bid Serious 3NT, allowing maximum space to hear partner's weak-hand cuebidding finalization. If, on the other hand, I use non-serious, I am compelled to do the telling, perhaps with too much to tell, leaving partner to guess my thoughts. Similarly, I limit LTTC to the partner with expressed serious interest. If I cue, say, 4C as serious, with hearts as trumps, partner, the weaker hand, has limited info and limited options. In all auctions, therefore, the "non-serious" school seems to favor the strong hand telling and the weak hand deciding, whereas the "serious" school facilitates the weaker hand telling and the stronger hand deciding. The latter seems ideal. Am I missing something, or is non-disclosure simply favored over enhanced slam decision-making? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 Two options at serious/frivolous 3NT time: 1) bidder has a serious slam try. - serious: bids 3NT and weaker hand must cuebid. - frivolous: cues (strong hand)2) bidder has a mild slam try. - serious: cues (weaker hand cues). - frivolous: bids 3NT. If the strong hand is interested, cues; if not, bids game. If you're sciencing slam, you're going to give the information out anyway - although if you've done it right, the hand "telling" is dummy. If you're sciencing and bail, though, you've either given out the information or got to the 5 level, playing serious; you're at the 4 level with "do you want to try slam?" "No." playing frivolous. So, yeah, non-disclosure in non-slam over extra disclosure in slam decisions; I don't think it reduces slam decision-making (especially combined with 1st and 2nd) as usually the weaker hand only has to make one cue for the strong hand to make the decision. At teams, it probably works out even or slightly advantageously for Serious; but the overtricks you get in game playing Frivolous is MP gold. Michael. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 "it probably works out even or slightly advantageously for Serious; but the overtricks you get in game playing Frivolous is MP gold" This is my thought, confirmed. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfgauss Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 I consider non-serious superior (for non-disclosure reasons) not just at MPs, but also at IMPs as frivolous cuebidding sometimes leads to them setting your game. Andy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.