[Cyberyeti]

Free, on 2010-December-23, 08:39, said:

Why would you open 3NT anyways? When partner can stop 3 suits while opps can't take 5 tricks, and when he has at least 1 ♦ support, then you might as well open 1♦ and rightside the 3NT contract, play 5♦ anyways, or easily find a laydown slam.

You and partner like guessing the right thing to do when the auction goes 1♦-(1♠)-X-(4♠)- when a 3N bid may shut opps out and might put partner in a decent place to judge if it doesn't. It's not the best convention but it can do a useful job.

[gwnn]

I played fred's 3N (65 majors weakish) in two partnerships now and it has come up once, in bidding practice. But I still had a pleasant feeling the whole time knowing how cool it will be when it will come up. You can't put that in terms of imps. Well I know it will sound like Pascal's wager but try it! What have you got to lose? It really is a life changer.

[Vampyr]

Zelandakh, on 2015-November-06, 11:12, said:

Are you sure you mean SAT rather than Namyats here?

I don't know. Not sure what Namyats is, but I thought it was some sort of two-under transfer.

[mikestar13]

Vampyr, on 2015-November-06, 20:04, said:

I don't know. Not sure what Namyats is, but I thought it was some sort of two-under transfer.

The terminology as I learned it (ACBL Official Encyclopedia of Bridge):


Namyats:
4♣ opening = strong 4♥ opening, for whichever definition of strong the partnership has.
4♦ opening = strong 4♠ opening.
Normally combined with 3NT = 4 minor opening.

South African Texas (SAT):
4♣ response to 1NT/2NT = transfer to hearts.
4♦ response to 1NT/2NT = transfer to spades.

I suppose that 3NTopening = strong major 4 opening might be called "reverse namyats" (This treatment is not legal on the ACBL General Convention Chart unless the major is solid.)

Terminology may well vary in other countries, which is why the regulating authorities tell us we should say what the bid shows rather than naming the convention when asked to explain.

[Vampyr]

mikestar13, on 2015-November-07, 01:43, said:

Terminology may well vary in other countries, which is why the regulating authorities tell us we should say what the bid shows rather than naming the convention when asked to explain.

At the table, obviously. But this is a discussion forum; it's not the same.

In any case, our 3NT bid is neither SAT nor Namyats, just a stronger 4-major opening. We have some requirements involving length/solidity of the suit and outside values.

[Trick13]

helene_t, on 2010-December-23, 11:17, said:

...
But it is not very frequent. I think some (semi-)specific 5-6 shape would be more frequent and probably also a useful use of the 3NT opening but I have no experience with that.

Some simulations in dealer ...

You are dealt a gambling 3NT somewhere between 5 and 6 times every 10,000 deals, depending on your preferences.
You are dealt a 5M6M with 5 to 7 losers about 16 times every 10,000 deals.

[MinorKid]

Free, on 2010-December-30, 15:20, said:

Just for the record, I meant on THIS hand. Playing gambling 3NT in a pickup partnership is probably best, but that doesn't mean I'd open 3NT on the hand given above.

Gambling 3NT is a gamble, if partner holds 3 Aces it's no longer a gamble, I know that. But with this hand, lots of the time 5♦ will be a lot safer (no need to gamble), or any NT contract (rightsided or not) may provide an easy 12 tricks. However, responder will only count on 7 tricks, not 8, so how can he accurately judge what the hand is worth (with AK, A and A he won't bid slam)? I'm sure most don't have an asking bid to know how long the minor is, most can ask about a shortness. But then which one should we show...

3NT - 4NT -

Basically asking opener bid 6 if the hand contain an extra trick,
through is it for an 8 carder or 2 side Q's i have no idea.

[MinorKid]

Bbradley62, on 2010-December-22, 19:16, said:

Playing in an individual tournament, only 3 out of 29 dealers opened 3NT with this hand:

---

Yes, I definitely will open 3NT provided my partner is familiar with the convention and the aftermath.

[rmnka447]

If you play Gambling 3 NT, you should know the response structure.

- ♣ bids at any level are pass or correct,

- ♦ bids of 5 ♦ or higher are to play - "I know your suit and want to play the hand from my side." Usually it's to protect a stopper,

- 4 ♦ asks for a singleton - 4 M= singleton or void in M, 4 NT= no singleton or void, 5 m= opener's suit with singleton void in other m.

- 4 NT - Do you have an extra trick? (8 card suit?) - 5 m= no, 6 m=yes

- 5 NT - Can you play opposite a void? 6 m=no, 7 m= yes

Unfortunately in an individual tournament, it's probably a very mixed bag whether one's partners know what to do opposite a Gambling NT. So I can understand the reluctance to use the bid there.

As for the responses, the occasional hands do come up that make them useful. Opposite a Gambling 3 NT, I held ♠ AKQJ ♥ xxx ♦ xx ♣ AKxx and ventured a slightly risky 4 ♦ versus a top team in a regional KO (5 ♦ could go down if partner held ♥ xxx). Partner had a momentary brain cramp and passed, but we were NV and the damage wasn't too severe as the (real) expert opponents sitting our way at the other table only reached 5 ♦. Partner's hand was ♠ xx ♥ x ♦ AKQJ10xx ♣ xxx. If partner finds the proper 4 ♥ bid, we would have landed a NV small slam swing which would have been enough to win.

[pescetom]

rmnka447, on 2018-March-22, 22:00, said:

- 4 ♦ asks for a singleton - 4 M= singleton or void in M, 4 NT= no singleton or void, 5 m= opener's suit with singleton void in other m.

We invert the last two replies, but thinking about it your version is a little better.

rmnka447, on 2018-March-22, 22:00, said:

- 4 NT - Do you have an extra trick? (8 card suit?) - 5 m= no, 6 m=yes

Our 4NT replies are - Pass= 7-card and no side Q, 5 in suit= side Q in suit, 6m= 8-card

rmnka447, on 2018-March-22, 22:00, said:

- 5 NT - Can you play opposite a void? 6 m=no, 7 m= yes

Didn't know this one, thanks

[barmar]

Trick13, on 2015-November-07, 14:47, said:

Some simulations in dealer ...
[indent]You are dealt a gambling 3NT somewhere between 5 and 6 times every 10,000 deals, depending on your preferences.

But you're in 1st or 2nd seat only half of these times. And if you're in second seat, RHO will often open.

So the opportunity to use gambling 3NT probably only comes up about once in 10K hands.

In comparison, you get 25-27 HCP almost as often as a gambling 3NT, but you don't have to worry much about which seat you're in -- you'll usually be the one to open the bidding.

[pescetom]

barmar, on 2018-March-24, 20:12, said:

So the opportunity to use gambling 3NT probably only comes up about once in 10K hands.

In comparison, you get 25-27 HCP almost as often as a gambling 3NT, but you don't have to worry much about which seat you're in -- you'll usually be the one to open the bidding.

I can show 25-27 HCP balanced quite easily with Kokish 2NT.
But I agree that gambling with a closed minor comes up so rarely that it is hardly worth dedicating 3NT to it and I regret making this choice.
There are plenty of other potential uses, such as 4m replacement or strong 5-5.

[barmar]

pescetom, on 2018-March-25, 06:50, said:

I can show 25-27 HCP balanced quite easily with Kokish 2NT.
But I agree that gambling with a closed minor comes up so rarely that it is hardly worth dedicating 3NT to it and I regret making this choice.
There are plenty of other potential uses, such as 4m replacement or strong 5-5.

I have one occasional partner who really thinks gambling 3NT is important. But he also has a habit of shading his requirements, so that he's able to use it more often (and similarly for 2-suiter bids like Michaels). It's super-annoying because it makes competing and sacrificing difficult if I can't count on him to have what his bids show.