[gwnn]

x
xxx
x
AKJTxxxx

IMPs 1st seat all vulnerable, your opening bid?

4♣ is natural if you want to use it.
3NT is gambling, you may use it if you like but the agreement is AKQ7th.

[shyams]

I'd choose 4♣

[ArtK78]

AKJTxxxx is roughly equivalent to AKQxxxx for the purposes of 3NT gambling.

I would choose that.

It may lead to partner misevaluating a control rich hand for purposes of bidding 6♣ or 6NT as you have one more club than expected, but a 4♣ bid will not solve that problem, either, and it could easily by-pass the most likely game. Partner will expect a club suit of KQJxxxxx for a 4♣ opening rather than 8 (hopefully) running tricks.

[helene_t]

If we have discussed 4♣ style then obviously 4♣ if this hand fits the definition. I think it is the best style to open 4♣ with this hand but obviously p needs to expect a hand as good as this one.

Otherwise 3NT.

[TylerE]

3-unt.

[whereagles]

Prefer 3NT, though I wouldn't haggle with 4♣.

[jjbrr]

I don't think that suit is even close to being good enough for gambling 3NT. 4♣ is my choice.

[jdonn]

3NT has problems, but I want to bid a lot and I don't want to bypass 3NT so.... hey at least partner won't pass with a club void.

The suit is not even close to good enough for 3NT huh? I wonder what the suit is that's close but not quite good enough. AKJT9876?

[PhantomSac]

Seems like a down the middle 4C opener at this vul.

[pooltuna]

jjbrr, on Mar 8 2010, 10:11 AM, said:

I don't think that suit is even close to being good enough for gambling 3NT. 4♣ is my choice.

you need to do some calculations if you think AKJTxxxx is substanially inferior to AKQxxxx

[billw55]

It's probably wrong, but at the table I'd be tempted to try 5♣ with such a good suit. Ops finding 4M isn't so hard over 4♣. And on the off chance it makes, it's game.

[PhantomSac]

pooltuna, on Mar 8 2010, 10:55 AM, said:

jjbrr, on Mar 8 2010, 10:11 AM, said:

I don't think that suit is even close to being good enough for gambling 3NT. 4♣ is my choice.

you need to do some calculations if you think AKJTxxxx is substanially inferior to AKQxxxx

How about... if partner has a stiff then AKJTxxxx is about 15 % less likely to run than AKQxxxx? That is quite significant and not that unlikely of a scenario.

[nigel_k]

3NT has some downsides. Your suit might not run and if it does you have an extra trick which could be important if partner is considering 5♣ or 6♣. Also, something rather bad could happen if partner is looking at three small diamonds and the ♣Q.

The obvious upside is that 3NT could be the only making game, but my best guess is that the gain from making 3NT when 5♣ fails and opponents remain silent won't be enough to compensate for the hands where 3NT is wrong.

A further issue is I don't know how many clubs to bid. Justin says it is a down the middle 4♣ but it looks like a down the middle four and a half clubs to me. Maybe that swings it in favour of 3NT.

[655321]

Don't mind 4♣, also opening 1♣ can often work on these hands where the suit is so good that missing 3NT is a concern.

[Fluffy]

seems I am very lonely on my 3♣ pick

[pooltuna]

PhantomSac, on Mar 8 2010, 11:40 AM, said:

pooltuna, on Mar 8 2010, 10:55 AM, said:

jjbrr, on Mar 8 2010, 10:11 AM, said:

I don't think that suit is even close to being good enough for gambling 3NT. 4♣ is my choice.

you need to do some calculations if you think AKJTxxxx is substanially inferior to AKQxxxx

How about... if partner has a stiff then AKJTxxxx is about 15 % less likely to run than AKQxxxx? That is quite significant and not that unlikely of a scenario.

it is not really about if one is significantly better than the other. My calculations show AKJTxxxx will produce 8 tricks 75% of the time. What you need to decide is, is that good enough to bid gambling 3NT?

[jjbrr]

pooltuna, on Mar 9 2010, 12:46 PM, said:

PhantomSac, on Mar 8 2010, 11:40 AM, said:

pooltuna, on Mar 8 2010, 10:55 AM, said:

jjbrr, on Mar 8 2010, 10:11 AM, said:

I don't think that suit is even close to being good enough for gambling 3NT. 4♣ is my choice.

you need to do some calculations if you think AKJTxxxx is substanially inferior to AKQxxxx

How about... if partner has a stiff then AKJTxxxx is about 15 % less likely to run than AKQxxxx? That is quite significant and not that unlikely of a scenario.

it is not really about if one is significantly better than the other. My calculations show AKJTxxxx will produce 8 tricks 75% of the time. What you need to decide is, is that good enough to bid gambling 3NT?

My personal style is that it is not.

[eyhung]

If I were dealt this hand at the table, I know I would have opened 3NT, but in the cold light of analysis away from it, I have become convinced that 4♣ is right. Consider that :

1) Partner is much more likely to be void in clubs when you hold eight clubs than seven.

2) When partner is stiff (again, more likely with eight clubs than seven) the suit only runs 52.5% of the time as opposed to 68%.

3) The opponents have more room to show majors (they can use 4♣ as strong hearts and 4♦ as strong spades), and they are more likely to have a good major-suit contract with your eighth club.

4) Unless you have good methods over 3NT (who does?) it will be hard to identify the 8th club for club contract evaluation.

Nice hand.

[jdonn]

But,

1) Partner won't pass 3NT with a void so what does it matter?
2) True although maybe it's stiff queen? So probably more like 62%.
3) If the opponent is 3 suited with short clubs (more likely?) he can't show his shape since his double just shows a good hand and passing first might get 3NT passed out.
4) I thought it was normal to have a bid to ask for an extra trump. Of course even then he may assume 8 to the AKQ so you could get to a dicey contract, it's true.

[eyhung]

jdonn, on Mar 9 2010, 05:50 PM, said:

But,

1) Partner won't pass 3NT with a void so what does it matter?
2) True although maybe it's stiff queen? So probably more like 62%.
3) If the opponent is 3 suited with short clubs (more likely?) he can't show his shape since his double just shows a good hand and passing first might get 3NT passed out.
4) I thought it was normal to have a bid to ask for an extra trump. Of course even then he may assume 8 to the AKQ so you could get to a dicey contract, it's true.

1) My point is that partner holding a club void is never a winning scenario for the 3NT call and is sometimes a losing scenario. Say partner bids 4C pass or correct, which he will always do with a club void. Do you now bid 5C guessing that your eighth club will be enough, or do you pass and miss a good game when partner has a singleton club and your extra trump is the 11th trick?

2) Yeah, stiff Q helps. So 80% of the time partner is singleton, he will have a 52.5% chance of bringing in the suit, and 20% of the time, the suit runs. So 62.5% when partner has a stiff. I guess I should sim how much more frequently partner is stiff opposite an 8-bagger than a 7-bagger...

3) There are other more complicated defenses to 3NT that can handle those three-suiters. For example, 4m showing some length in that minor and at least one major (asks partner to bid better major but partner can raise the minor if short in major). But yes, most opponents don't have a fancy defense here so there's little difference between 3NT and 4C on this point.