Defenining Against Gambling 3NT Opening

[SimonFa]

What agreements do people have against Gambling 3NT opening, assuming a standard running minor suit with no outside ace? Do they vary depending on which seat bids it?

 

Absence any agreement how would you approach this hand:

 

R v W, teams.

 

♠AK87 ♥KJT93 ♦AQJ8 ♣Void

 

(3NT) ?

 

It struck me that whilst I know which suit the bidder has partner probably doesn't have a clue so a double could show the majors or it will just add confusion and could be a disaster at these colours. On the other hand if we pass we could be missing a nice vulnerable game or even a slam.

 

As always, thanks in advance for your comments,

 

Simon

[CamHenry]

If you take all 13 tricks, that's +450 against your vulnerable game: you should not pass out a gambling 3NT at these colours unless you can't make a contract. Here, it looks very much like you've got a contract making.

 

I think sensible agreements are "double shows values" or "double shows majors". LHO will almost certainly pull this one, since even with QJxx/AQxx/Kxx/xx he doesn't know you haven't got 5 fast tricks, and that's all the unplaced values in his hand. You're then fairly well placed.

[mr1303]

In The Abbott's Great Sacrifice, a girl's team from Southampton University plays 4C here as take out of clubs and 4D as take out of diamonds, with emphasis on the majors.

[PhilKing]

I use my 1NT defence, which is Multi Landy. So here I could bid 4♣ to show both majors(and maybe follow with 5♦).

 

However, the better call is probably double (just a decent hand to start with), and I anticipate making a take-out double of 4♣/5♣ as well. We could be cold for 7♦.

[helene_t]

ML with Shogi and Manudude03. I don't think I have discussed it with other partners.

 

My first impulse was 4♣ followed by 5♦ but maybe Phil is right.

[Trinidad]

There is a defense against 1NT that never really got a great following, but that works very well against gamblng 3NT. It is called Ripstra.

 

Double: penalties

4♣: Both majors + something (Hxx or so) in clubs (i.e. "partner, their suit is diamonds")

4♦: Both majors + something (Hxx or so) in diamonds (i.e. "partner, their suit is clubs")

4M: natural, to play

 

It looks like it is made for your hand: The easiest Ripstra 4♦ bid ever.

 

Rik

[kenrexford]

The methods that I described in my book Overcalling Opponent's 1NT would work well here, as well, because of the potential need to show a two-suiter with either major and either minor efficiently.

 

For example, one could easily play:

 

4♣ = both majors or one major and clubs. Advancer picks his better major, assuming both majors, but bidding 4♦ to prefer spades. If Advancer picks hearts (4♥) but Overcaller has spades+clubs, Overcaller corrects to 4♠. If Advancer picks spades (4♦) but Overcaller had hearts and clubs, he corrects to 4♥.

 

4♦ = One major

 

4♥ = hearts plus diamonds

 

4♠ = spades plus diamonds

 

That method, then, allows all five expected two-suiters to be handled efficiently, as well as all one-suiters. (You could reverse structure to make 4♦ one major plus diamonds, with 4M natural.)

[ggwhiz]

In The Abbott's Great Sacrifice, a girl's team from Southampton University plays 4C here as take out of clubs and 4D as take out of diamonds, with emphasis on the majors.

 

We play the basically the same defense against multi 2♦ where 2 of a major is takeout of the suit you bid so use 4♣/♦ for 3 suited hands here.

 

Double is a 2-suiter either major minor or both majors. Penalty makes no sense since they will always run. Kens approach over 1nt is good but you don't want to come in with 3 suits against a strong nt and here you do. Maybe it would work fine if you used Double to show those hands?

 

 

And 1 suited majors bid it. The hole is a 1 suited minor that has to bid 5 or pass so we don't get dealt those hands.

[kenrexford]

We play the basically the same defense against multi 2♦ where 2 of a major is takeout of the suit you bid so use 4♣/♦ for 3 suited hands here.

 

Double is a 2-suiter either major minor or both majors. Penalty makes no sense since they will always run. Kens approach over 1nt is good but you don't want to come in with 3 suits against a strong nt and here you do. Maybe it would work fine if you used Double to show those hands?

 

 

And 1 suited majors bid it. The hole is a 1 suited minor that has to bid 5 or pass so we don't get dealt those hands.

 

 

Yes -- you can double with three-suiters or with canapé hands (major with longer minor usually 4-6)

 

If you have 4-4-1-4 or 4-4-4-1 and partner picks a major, great!

 

If you have 4♠ and a longer minor, and partner picks spades, great!

 

If you have 4♥ and a longer minor, and partner picks hearts, great!

 

If you have 4♠ and a longer minor, and partner picks hearts, try 4♠ as a spade-MINOR canapé.

 

If you have 4♥ and a longer minor, and partner picks spades, bid your minor.

 

If partner tries 4♣, bid 4♦ with 4-4-4-1 or your major with 4M/6♦

 

If partner tries 4♦, bid 4♠ with 4♠/6♣.

 

If partner tries 4♦ and you have 4-4-1-4 or 4♥/6♣, try 4♥ and then correct to 5♣ with the latter (or just bid 5♣ with the latter directly).

 

If partner has no major of 4+ length, btw, he may well decide to pass the double. So, he usually has one if he bids.

[ggwhiz]

And partner can stall with 3nt over a double as a reverse kind of lebensohl to show positive slam type values for whatever you are headed for.

[gnasher]

A multi-way defence doesn't work very well if they bid five of a minor over it. I think it's better to play

4♣ = one-suited in hearts, or hearts + a minor

4♦ = one-suited in spades, or 5-4 majors

4♥ = 4-5 or 5-5 majors

4♠ = spades + a minor

 

so that opener's major, or his longer major, is always known.