Replacement for gambling 3NT?

[Quartic]

Tonight this hand came up:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sj95h6dakqjt84cj2&w=sat643hj854d762c5&n=sqh9732d9cakq9874&e=sk872hakqtd53ct63&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=3n(Solid%20minor%2C%20no%20outside%20A/K)p4d(Asking%20for%20shortage.)pp(I%20don%27t%20remember%20the%20continuations.)p]399|300[/hv]

 

I was North, and realised shortly after my 4!d bid that I shouldn't have bid it - there being no way we had 6!d unless partner has a heart void, which he won't be able to tell me.

 

Discussing at the end of the evening, it was suggested that the Gambling 3NT isn't a very good use of a 3NT opening anyway, and that we should find an alternative. One suggestion was using it to show a solid 8 card Major, allowing a 4M opening to be a broken suit.

 

Is this a good use for it, and what would the follow ups be? Are there any other treatments we should consider?

[Cyberyeti]

Well if the auction starts 3N-4♦-4♥ I would suggest that 4♠ can ask for a heart void.

 

You could equally use 3N as 4 level preempt in a minor and play namyats with the solid suits to specify which major you hold immediately.

[MickyB]

3N = good 4H bid is a good compromise between theoretical merit and memory-load.

[Quartic]

3N = good 4H bid is a good compromise between theoretical merit and memory-load.

 

We're not too bad with memory load as long as it comes up sufficiently frequently.

[MickyB]

We're not too bad with memory load as long as it comes up sufficiently frequently.

 

It depends on your requirements for a good 4M opening, but I doubt the frequency is that different from a gambling 3N. Your OP suggests this shouldn't be counted as "sufficiently frequent" B-)

[the hog]

The Borins, who were one of the worlds' best mixed partnerships, had good success with 3NT as a solid Major.

Now 4C asks, 4D = H and 4H = S, 4D = s/t ask. Bid your s/t or bid 4NT without.

 

Klinger suggests 3NT should be a specific ace ask.

[SteveMoe]

Found some applicable past conversation:

3NT Opening

To add to what Hog said (Some call 3N for a solid Major the Kantar 3N) I'd add:

 

1) Acol 3N - 7222/6322 solid/semisolid suit 16-21 HCP and 2-3 side suits stopped.

2) Weak 4m preempt - useful when playing Namyats.

 

Did have a conversation about Gambling 3N with a local GLM who allowed that conventions range from frequent/full of advantage/unhelpful to the opponents to infrequent/helpful to the opponents/usually wrong-siding the contract. He suggested gambling 3N as a prime example of the latter.

He prefers weak 4m preempt.

[Siegmund]

I liked Kantar 3NT on paper, and found it came up often enough to keep it fresh in my memory.

 

When it did come up we didn't necessarily get any great gain from it, and it was a bit anti-field to have the long major on the table (the published version.) In theory the more-known hand was on the table, but that was also the hand where a surprise singleton or void was most damaging to the defense. The 4D=H, 4H=S alternative gets you back to the same side as the field but gives people 3 shots at doubles.

 

I did improve the accuracy of our bidding after 4M openings. I am not certain it is better than Gambling.

[jillybean]

We've just added Namyats so are going to use 3N as a relay to 4C showing an 8+ card minor preempt, pass or correct.

[Mbodell]

We've just added Namyats so are going to use 3N as a relay to 4C showing an 8+ card minor preempt, pass or correct.

 

Be a little careful with the disclosure (or agreement) as partner of the 3nt bidder should be allowed to pass 3nt.

[lowerline]

The Borins, who were one of the worlds' best mixed partnerships, had good success with 3NT as a solid Major.

Now 4C asks, 4D = H and 4H = S, 4D = s/t ask. Bid your s/t or bid 4NT without.

 

Klinger suggests 3NT should be a specific ace ask.

 

Or:

 

4♣ = asks transfer into major

4♦ = asks major

 

If you bid on over partners answer, your initial 4m must be re-interpreted as a cue and slam-interest...

 

Steven

[P_Marlowe]

65 in the majors, this was suggested by Fred Gitleman.

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/34827-3nt-opening/page__st__20__p__403051__hl__%2Bgambling+%2Bnt__fromsearch__1#entry403051

 

Maybe it is possible to make it work, that 3NT showes 65 with at least 1 major, i.e excluding 65 minors.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[jillybean]

Be a little careful with the disclosure (or agreement) as partner of the 3nt bidder should be allowed to pass 3nt.

At risk of threadjacking, I am not sure that I understand this. If we disclose that 3N is showing one long minor, transfer to

4C, pass/correct, do we also need to say partner is free to pass? This is the case in any transfer situation, partner is free

to break the transfer.

[Cyberyeti]

At risk of threadjacking, I am not sure that I understand this. If we disclose that 3N is showing one long minor, transfer to

4C, pass/correct, do we also need to say partner is free to pass? This is the case in any transfer situation, partner is free

to break the transfer.

If you say "shows a 4 level preempt in a minor" this is fine, immediately you use the word transfer people might think it was basically mandatory.

[P_Marlowe]

At risk of threadjacking, I am not sure that I understand this. If we disclose that 3N is showing one long minor, transfer to

4C, pass/correct, do we also need to say partner is free to pass? This is the case in any transfer situation, partner is free

to break the transfer.

You used the words "3NT as a relay" to 4C, ..., if your disclosure stops here, peoble can expect, that partner bids on,

if you continue, "..., it showes a hand with a long minor", you will be fine again.

 

But I think, you could / should simply say "3NT showes a hand with a long minor".

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[mycroft]

I explain that call as "a 4-level preempt in one of the minors". I agree that explaining anything about what partner is going to do is both useless information and potentially dangerous when partner doesn't do that (passes 3NT, bids his suit, bids 5/6m, ...)

[Finch]

 

Discussing at the end of the evening, it was suggested that the Gambling 3NT isn't a very good use of a 3NT opening anyway, and that we should find an alternative. One suggestion was using it to show a solid 8 card Major, allowing a 4M opening to be a broken suit.

 

Is this a good use for it, and what would the follow ups be? Are there any other treatments we should consider?

 

I use it as a 9-playing trick hand in a major i.e. stronger than a 4M opening, although not a 2C bid (which we play as game forcing). It usually has 8 trumps, typically 9 playing tricks.

Responses:

 

4C = please transfer to your major

4D = at least a mild slam try (opener bids 4M minimum, others obvious)

4H/4S = singleton or void in bid suit, otherwise a slam try (i.e. looking for very good trumps opposite)

4NT = straight ace keycard

5m = to play

others = don't exist

[jallerton]

3N = good 4H bid is a good compromise between theoretical merit and memory-load.

 

So what meaning do you consider to have the best theoretical merit (in the context of a natural system)?

[han]

I also play 3NT as a strong 4M opening but with different responses:

 

4C = slam try in major.

4D = sign off, opener should not compete to 5M.

4H = p/c but opener may decide to compete to 5M with extra length.

[helene_t]

At risk of threadjacking, I am not sure that I understand this. If we disclose that 3N is showing one long minor, transfer to

4C, pass/correct, do we also need to say partner is free to pass? This is the case in any transfer situation, partner is free

to break the transfer.

Yes but partner is not normally allowed to pass the transfer bid.

 

It is generally best to say what a bid shows, rather than what it asks partner to do. You can make expections for things like stayman, nmf and fsf which cover an wide range of hands while they are reasonably easy to explain in terms of what they ask for. But in this case, it is easy to explain what the 3nt bid shows: a weak hand with a long minor.

[gwnn]

3NT=6 hearts+5 cards in a minor, ~7-10 hcp is a great use, as far as I know coming from awm, and my favourite choice.

Fred (said he) likes 3NT=6-5 in the majors or better, just under opening strength.

I saw on some CC's (I think Ekeblad among others) 3NT=both minors, weak.

 

Finally for something quite crazy (but which just might work) that I read long ago on the forums from dellache: 3NT=a good 6-card minor, near-minimum opening. There was some special point-counting method that defined the bid better, I believe.

 

aha, found it (my memory failed me, the hands are not near minimum): http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/34827-3nt-opening/

 

finally, it is quite probably unsound to play it as "to play", but at least there was a semi-flame war on whether it is legal.

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/18121-acbl-gcc-3nt-as-to-play/

[aguahombre]

It is generally best to say what a bid shows, rather than what it asks partner to do.... in this case, it is easy to explain what the 3nt bid shows: a weak hand with a long minor.

I have been pounding on this on other threads ---just how wrong it is to explain a bid in terms of what you are going to do next.

 

But, with Jilly's explanation of how they play the 3NT opening which shows a long minor I believe this might be the exception I could not find previously. There are many reasonable things responder can do after this 3NT opening:

 

Pass

Bid 4M to play

Bid 4C for pass/correct

Bid 4D for pass/correct with a hand too good to play in only 4C.

Bid at the five level pass/correct with an appropriate hand.

Bid 4N as an agreed tool.

 

And so on. Perhaps anyone who really has (only) 4C as their bid over 3NT should be disclosing it, since it is so entirely unexpected and unworkable.

[MickyB]

So what meaning do you consider to have the best theoretical merit (in the context of a natural system)?

 

No idea. I was just fairly confident that 3N = good 4H bid is reasonable, simple, but not the best theoretical meaning B-)

 

Thinking about it, the disadvantage of 3N [or 4m] promising a specific suit is that it's much easier to defend against, in direct seat at least. It's unclear what a dbl of 3N [good 4M bid] should show.

 

3N showing a two-suiter is surprisingly rare, I'd expect 3N = minors to be quite a common agreement. IIRC Brad+Fred play it as the majors. I don't really get that, hearts+minor makes more sense to me, or perhaps something multi-ish like majors or minors.

 

Edit: Don't know how I missed Gwnn's post. 3NT = H+minor was the "MickyB 3NT" for about 5 minutes.

 

Reedit: It's ok, the MickyB 3NT can show 5H6m instead of 6H5m.

Edited September 3, 2012 by MickyB

[Zelandakh]

This is a theme that seems to come up on these forums regularly enough. A couple of options from the last thread that have not yet been mentioned are a specific ace ask and a good preempt to 4m (with 4m natural and weaker). The former is a rare beast but great when it comes up; the latter is an attempt to split minor suit preempts up more evenly between 3m, 3NT and 4m and avoids the temptation to open 3m on some hands that are worth 4 on playing strength but would prefer to keep 3NT in the picture. Of all the possibilities, the solid strong major preempt is surely the one gaining most popularity in expert circles in recent years.

[han]

I have never heard of anybody play it as a solid major.