[mtvesuvius]

8 board Swiss Team match, V vs NV you hold:

♠ T5
♥ 3
♦ AKQJT9752
♣ 8

You deal, what's your bid?

(You have not discussed Gambling 3NT in detail, but it is agreed that it denies outside Aces and Kings)

Your opponents are strong players, and are the 2nd place team...

[JLOL]

3N

[keylime]

3NT. Time to attack.

[peachy]

If '3NT Gambling' is on our card and ou agreement is it denies outside aces and kings exceot in fourth seat, then this is a 100% 3NT opening.

[akhare]

mtvesuvius, on Feb 2 2009, 12:06 PM, said:

8 board Swiss Team match, V vs NV you hold:

♠ T5
♥ 3
♦ AKQJT9752
♣ 8

You deal, what's your bid?

(You have not discussed Gambling 3NT in detail, but it is agreed that it denies outside Aces and Kings)

Your opponents are strong players, and are the 2nd place team...

5D -- 3N makes it too easy to find a 4M / 5♣ fit. Besides, 9 card suits are called trump ...

[MickyB]

5♦. 3NT seems slightly bizarre to say the least.

[Gerben42]

5♦

Partner will be more inclined to try slam after this than after 3NT (no way he will give you 9 tops after 3NT!). A vulnerable preempt should be descriptive and rather independent of who else is at the table. You have a perfect 5♦ bid.

A good example partner hand:

---

Clear pass of a 3NT opening, unfortunately wrongsiding it. Clear slam raise (5NT choice of slams) opposite 5♦ at this vuln.

[gwnn]

I don't think Gerben's hand is a raise of 5♦. I'm not really sure of 3NT vs 5D, I would like to do the other one than our opps. Anything else besides these two are bad.

[Phil]

1 or 5; never 3N.

[keylime]

I'm really surprised that many are advocating 5♦. You're playing with one of the true bridge greats of all time. Why wouldn't you want to tell him the exact nature of your hand?

[orlam]

keylime, on Feb 2 2009, 01:17 PM, said:

I'm really surprised that many are advocating 5♦. You're playing with one of the true bridge greats of all time. Why wouldn't you want to tell him the exact nature of your hand?

How would you do that?

[keylime]

You're playing Gambling 3NT. My view is that tell pard what they need to know.

If you start with 1D, by the time it gets back to you, you maybe having to bid 5♦, which if I couldn't open G3NT, I would have started with 5 just to get the hand off my chest. Additionally, let's say pard rebids 2C. What's your rebid? 3♦ is a slight overstatement, and 2♦ is a slight understatement...

If you start with 5♦, how would Jeff discern a hand with a couple of aces and supporting king in terms of slam prospects (assuming he has not passed originally)?

That's why I chose 3NT. If I got a multiple world champion across the table, I certainly am going to default to whatever decision he or she makes, after I show my hand in the full.

[jdonn]

keylime, on Feb 2 2009, 01:17 PM, said:

I'm really surprised that many are advocating 5♦. You're playing with one of the true bridge greats of all time. Why wouldn't you want to tell him the exact nature of your hand?

I find this comment interesting. I think I am doing that by opening 5♦.

3NT seems crazy to me. How is partner supposed to know when to try for slam if our hand can have 7-9 tricks?

[JLOL]

3N does not show a ninth diamond so you aren't "showing your hand in full"

5D also does not show your exact hand.

Also I think the concern about finding slam when it's right is not one of the main concerns. It's just a question of preempting them as much as you can vs getting to 3N when it is the right contract. I find it hard to get worked up over either way.

[JLOL]

jdonn, on Feb 2 2009, 01:31 PM, said:

3NT seems crazy to me. How is partner supposed to know when to try for slam if our hand can have 7-9 tricks?

SEVEN tricks vulnerable against not is just stupid. I guess now I understand why people might strongly dislike 3N so much though. If you can open 3N with 7 solid red/white then I would hate 3N also.

[keylime]

For me, slam is at best, a secondary concern.

My main concern, is to preempt the majors to heck and back. 5♦ does do that definitely, but for flexibility, I chose 3NT. I wonder what Larry would choose; I wouldn't be surprised if he tables 5♦ himself knowing him.

[neilkaz]

keylime, on Feb 2 2009, 12:17 PM, said:

I'm really surprised that many are advocating 5♦. You're playing with one of the true bridge greats of all time. Why wouldn't you want to tell him the exact nature of your hand?

Yes, and 5♦ Red vs White does just that ! I have 9♦ and can take 9 tricks with ♦ as trumps. OK..perhaps I could have a 10 bagger missing a top honor or not, but one thing's for sure, when I open 5♦ at these colors I am taking no less than 9 tricks with ♦ as trumps and likely have a nearly useless hand outside of ♦.

It is considerably easier for PD to bid slam after 5♦ then it is 3NT IMHO. I am pretty sure that in the superb Preempts from A-Z book, they don't advocate opening 3NT with a 9 bagger. (am at work so can't check). PD won't expect me to have more than 8 and may pass hands where 6♦ or 6NT is cold. Most of the hands where PD will leave 3NT in will be ice cold for 5♦ and some will make 6♦.

For 3NT to make and 5♦ to go set would be quite rare, indeed, and PD has to have a ♦ to leave 3NT in.

5♦ is considerably more preemptive than 3NT. If the opps double 5♦ all we can do is go -500 on a hand where they certainly have game and sometimes have missed a slam (perhaps a grand if one of them in void).

LOL at the 1♦ bidders. I hate walking the dog with preemptive hands vs good opps and we'll be forced to 5♦ in comp anyhow.

Clear 5♦ opener at these colors for me, noting how unlikely it is to hold a hand to open 5m V vs NV

[jdonn]

JLOL, on Feb 2 2009, 01:35 PM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 2 2009, 01:31 PM, said:

3NT seems crazy to me. How is partner supposed to know when to try for slam if our hand can have 7-9 tricks?

SEVEN tricks vulnerable against not is just stupid. I guess now I understand why people might strongly dislike 3N so much though. If you can open 3N with 7 solid red/white then I would hate 3N also.

You are the only person I have ever met who has said this (granted I'm sure there are others - I must admit I don't often have conversations with experts about gambling 3NT!) But I am 100% certain that among people who play gambling 3NT you are not only in a minority that wouldn't open 3NT with x xx AKQJxxx xxx when r/w, but a quite vast minority.

Anyway I hate the convention (no matter how many tricks you want it to show when you open it), and even if playing it and knowing partner believes I can have this hand I wouldn't want to use it since I want to block 4M from the opponents.

[whereagles]

I'll open 3NT, meckstroth or no meckstroth.

[mike777]

I'll try 5d.