3N
If gambling, then obvious. Don't worry about the void: the 'book' doesn't show hands with voids so as not to get people thinking that they have to have one
But I would bid it even playing 3N as a 4-level minor preempt: usually denying a solid suit. I would open this 1♣ only if the opps promised to pass.
My 'toy' for this hand is 2♠, any solid suit. I can do this when playing 2♥ is a weak 2 in a major.
Over 2♠, 2N asks opener to bid the suit below the solid suit, ensuring that responder gets to play 3 of the 4 possible denominations, and of course he can often bid 3N. 3♣ is pass or correct for non-game hands.
First hand preempt? Or too good?
#21
Posted 2005-July-20, 08:44
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
#22
Posted 2005-July-21, 04:53
Obvious 3NT gambling.
As a side remark, do not play that Gambling shows a side stopper. If partner then has two stoppers in the side suits and passes hoping you stop the third, invariably you don't and opponents happily cash their suit. A typical hand would look like this:
After 3NT from West, East will not know if he should pass or not. If 3NT denies a side stopper things are easy.
As a side remark, do not play that Gambling shows a side stopper. If partner then has two stoppers in the side suits and passes hoping you stop the third, invariably you don't and opponents happily cash their suit. A typical hand would look like this:
After 3NT from West, East will not know if he should pass or not. If 3NT denies a side stopper things are easy.