serious or not?

[kgr]

Do you prefer 'serious 3NT' or 'not serious 3NT'? Are there any advantages of the one above the other?

Maybe an advantage of 'not serious 3NT' is that you can stop in 3NT iso going to 5m?

[Robert]

Hi everyone

 

Serious and non serious 3NT auctions are used 'after' a major suit has been agreed. I have not seen anything that showed a serious(non) 3NT used in a minor auction.

 

I suspect that there is little to pick from the serious vs non serious schools. I prefer the serious 3NT because I normally have several features to 'show' and this alerts partner that I have 'solid extra' values. If I hold a mild slam type, I get to bid my lowest control and also show only mild interest.

 

If you are using a minor auction and someone bids 3NT, the auction often is passed out. In a serious 3NT auction, the auction continues to 4M 'without' some private agreement being involved.

 

Regards,

Robert

[mcphee]

I think serious 3NT is great once the 8 card major fit is found. Something that allows either hand to redefine their hand within boundaries has to be good.

[helene_t]

If the partner of the potential 3NT-bidder is captain, 3NT looses one step of bidding space since the captian must ask for features with 4♣ so the 3NT-bidder must start at 4♦ rather than 4♣. Now it could be that bidding space is more precious in a serious auction than in a non-serious auction. But the converse could also be true. And if the 3NT-bidder's partner is not necesarilly captain, I don't see it matters.

 

Except in the case where you reach 6M and then correct to 6NT to get the extra ten points at MP. In that case, 3NT may wrong-side the contract.

[inquiry]

Not serious keeps from showing the opponents where your controls are, the auction goes..

 

major-something

something-fit

notserious - stop

 

While serious goes

major-something

something-fit

cuebid-stop

 

I guess i prefer not serious if i think aobut it, but i have always played serious

[whereagles]

It's all the same. I prefer non-serious because then cues automatically mean something extra and thus it's harder to have a misunderstanding with respect to strength

[neilkaz]

What I have read here, so far, is causing me to believe that non-serious makes more sense.

 

If non-serious just shows a nice hand with some bit extra, then if responder is minimum he just signs off. Now the defence doesn't have the advantage of knowing where a control is and also cannot make a lead directing or shift direction double.

 

Sometime a game gets set on bad splits or cards offside when a hand with a bit extra is opposite a minimum so why give anymore info to the defence ?

 

With Q-bids then reserved for very nice hands, making the game simply cannot be in question. Now PD can cooperate if he can, with further Q's.

[awm]

There seem to be two approaches to serious/nonserious:

 

(1) The "nonserious" bid shows a minimum hand. A "serious" try shows extras. Bidding 4M directly denies a control outside the trump suit.

 

(2) The "nonserious" bid shows extras. A "serious" try shows a lot extra. Bidding 4M directly shows a minimum.

 

I think method (1) was the original intent and is somewhat superior. The purpose of playing serious/nonserious distinction is when partner has a big hand and needs you to cooperate, and to distinguish between just cooperating and actually showing extras. But a lot of people seem to play method (2) and assume it's the usual one.

 

In any case I agree that non-serious is somewhat superior, because it conceals information from the opponents when the auction is ending in game (and avoids a lead-directing double in those cases), and because it keeps 3NT in the picture (especially useful when the major suit fit is only eight cards).

[pclayton]

We've been over this once or twice.

 

Non-serious is a little better, since you aren't cue bidding with garbage hands for the sake of partner possibly having a slam try. The garbage hands go through 3N.