[Quartic]

Tonight this hand came up:

---

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]

MickyB, on 2012-August-20, 17:21, said:

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]

Quartic, on 2012-August-20, 17:40, said:

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"

[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]

jillybean, on 2012-August-21, 00:01, said:

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 hog, on 2012-August-20, 19:05, said:

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.bridgebas...__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]

Mbodell, on 2012-August-21, 00:10, said:

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]

jillybean, on 2012-August-21, 06:56, said:

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]

jillybean, on 2012-August-21, 06:56, said:

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, ...)

[FrancesHinden]

Quartic, on 2012-August-20, 16:41, said:

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]

MickyB, on 2012-August-20, 17:21, said:

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]

jillybean, on 2012-August-21, 06:56, said:

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.