[helene_t]

In the name-the-worst-convention thread, some people mentioned Gambling 3NT because it tends to wrong-side the contract. This may be true. But then the obvious question arises: is there any alternative use for the 3NT opening?

I just got an idea: why not open 3NT with a minimum opening, a six-card minor and a five-card major. Those are quite difficult to describe otherwise (you must choose either to open the minor or the major, but both are imperfect). Something like
♠KJxxx ♥J ♦x ♣KQxxxx

Alternatively, you could open those hands with 4m and then use 3NT as Namyats.

Is this a good idea? (Not that I necesarily subscribe to the theory that Gambling 3NT is bad. Actually, I have good experience with it so far allthough I've only encountered it a few times).

[mikeh]

My vote for the worst convention would be mini-roman 2♦, but to address your issue: I like to use 3N as a 4-level minor preempt: a 4♣ or 4♦ hand. I need this because I play a modified form of Namyats: 4♣ is a good 4 level major opening with a non-solid suit, and 4♦ is a good major preempt with a solid, no loser suit (AKQ10xxx is minimum holding in the suit, and we would have another trick outside with that suit).

Over 4♣, 4♦ asks for the suit, while 4♥ is pass or correct.

Over 4♦, 4♥ is pass or correct.

Over either 4♣ or 4♦, 4♠ shows slam suitability with the 'other major' ace and the ♣, 5♣ shows slam suitability with both minor aces, and 5♦ shows slam suitability with the ♦A and the 'other major' A.

This scheme requires that the 4♣/♦ bidder always holds the ace of his major, but allows for opener to bid slam with the non-ace suit under control.

While my suspicion (unsupported by any analysis) is that the namyats hands arise more frequently than the moderate 5-6 major-minor hands you wish to show, the other 'strike' against your suggestion is that you may not find a playable contract at the 4-level. Namyats has the advantage that opener has, by definition, a playable 4-level fit in his own hand.

However, they still have to catch you speeding when no fit exists, and your suggested use would be difficult to defend against (double to show a strong balanced defensive hand, overcalls are natural, pass and then double takeout and so on spring to mind, but clearly the bid will wreak havoc on occasion).

Another method I have seen uses 3N as any solid suit: this doubles the frequency compared to gambling and allows for the occasional 3N when the field is in a failing 4Major.

[Al_U_Card]

Whenever I see a hand like that, I start thinking Leaping Michael's as the best way to express my values. It is more or less well-known and doesn't take the place of other bids that some may prefer.

[han]

I don't know about this Helene, I try to imagine how well responder is going to be placed, and I think not very well. I think that (1) often you will be too high and (2) often responder wants to play in the major if it's (say) spades, but in 4C otherwise.

Fred's suggestion in the gambling thread (play it as weak with 6-5 or better in the majors) seems better, as you will at least always be able to play in your best fit.

[Fluffy]

My daddy used to play 3♠= 'Alder' any long suit headed AKQ, 3NT any bad 8 card minor and 4♣/♦ as the common ♥/♠.


Then I found an italian friend who played something similar to what you were suggesting:

3NT= 6♣+5♦
4♣=6♦+5♥
4♦=6♥+5♠

We onlyplayed it once, and it appeared once in 30 boards, we scored a cold top.

[han]

I would expect the 4C through 4S bids to work much better than the 3NT bid, what bid actually came up that day?

[Walddk]

Any method might work out when you finally get a hand like this (don't hold your breath), but I prefer 3NT to be a pre-empt in either minor. They come up more frequently than the hand posted here.

The only purpose you should not use 3NT for is to show a solid minor. I agree with Fred when he says:

"If you open 3NT, you should only do it if you do not wish to play there".

Roland

[Fluffy]

Hannie, on Aug 5 2005, 12:51 AM, said:

I would expect the 4C through 4S bids to work much better than the 3NT bid, what bid actually came up that day?

If I recall correctly 6♦+5♥,they wouldn't find their 5-4 ♠ fit with divided strenght and we got +450.

[FrancesHinden]

Fluffy, on Aug 4 2005, 07:48 PM, said:

My daddy used to play 3♠= 'Alder' any long suit headed AKQ, 3NT any bad 8 card minor and 4♣/♦ as the common ♥/♠.


Then I found an italian friend who played something similar to what you were suggesting:

3NT= 6♣+5♦
4♣=6♦+5♥
4♦=6♥+5♠

We onlyplayed it once, and it appeared once in 30 boards, we scored a cold top.

ONce in 30 boards is quite good going. More frequent than a normal gambling 3NT.

[Blofeld]

What's the actual occurrence rate, though?

We have an anecdotal 1 in 30, but there's no reason that this ought to be correct in the long term. On the other hand, my gut feeling for it is that it is going to be more common than a gambling 3NT.

[Fluffy]

Of course there is not, ,now I think a bit more, I recall some of those bids were 2 way, because you could also show 6♠+5♣ (but you reach 4♠ to do so).

[Gerben42]

I also play and like Roland's 3NT opening bid, showing a 4m preempt with a broken suit.

If brown stickers are allowed and you want a home for the minor AKQxxxx hands you can play 3♥ as natural or ♣AKQxxxx and 3♠ similar with ♦. Or using the Transfer Preempt principle:

2NT is ♣ or strong ♥ + pointy
3♣ = ♦ or strong ♣ + major
3♦ = ♥ or strong ♦ + black
3♥ = solid ANY suit!
3♠ = ♠
3N = broken 8-card minor
4m = Namyats
4M = worse than 4m