[manudude03]

---

1st seat favorable, MPs scoring.

I'll split this into 2 polls, one for standard methods, and one for the system in use.

For better or worse (mostly worse), we were playing a strong club system without the precision 2C opening, so 1D would have to cater for all opening club hands as well as the diamond hands (2D opening is multi, this hand wouldn't cover either option). 3NT would have been a specific ace ask. With all that in mind, what do you open?

[TylerE]

3♦ to both and I don't think it's close.

Yes, it's probably going to go 4♠ next but I'm feeling a lot better about whatever partner does (including pass!) if I open 3 rather than 1.

[whereagles]

Textbook gambling 3NT. Not playing that I think I'll stretch it and bid 4♦. Reasons are:

1. Pard won't be expecting such good a suit, so even if 3NT is there, he's likely to misevaluate if I open 3♦ and not bid it. But if I open 4♦, he might go to 5 with some cards.. this might not happen if I open 3♦.

2. If stuff gets competitive, I'll be glad I opened 4♦, not 3.

[Zelandakh]

whereagles, on 2014-August-29, 03:09, said:

Textbook gambling 3NT.

How can a hand with a void be textbook for a call that denies an ace or void? It is a reasonable Gambling 3NT but by no means textbook.

The problem with 3♦ on a hand like this within the context of the OP system is that we are typically already stretching this for hands that might have opened a weak 2 in a standard set-up. If we stretch both on the bottom end and the top then it makes it even harder on partner than usual for wide-ranging preempts. This is one reason I would prefer to be playing 3NT as a good 4m preempt than a spcecifc ace ask within this context. It allows us to remove some of these hands from the top end without giving up on 3NT too often.

Given the above and the favourable vulnerability I prefer 5♦ to 3♦ but 4♦ is probably the value call. This is essentially the choice you make for giving up both 2♦ and 3NT for other purposes.

[gordontd]

Zelandakh, on 2014-August-29, 05:49, said:

How can a hand with a void be textbook for a call that denies an ace or void? It is a reasonable Gambling 3NT but by no means textbook.

Depends which textbooks you read.

[gordontd]

Duplicate

[Zelandakh]

gordontd, on 2014-August-29, 06:12, said:

Depends which textbooks you read.

Indeed, the original Gambling 3NT is something quite different with side suit requirements beyond no irst round control. So it would not surprise me in the least if there was a library of textbooks without that requirement - but it is still the most common version for a "pick-up textbook".

[TylerE]

At the very least every textbook I've ever read specifys an AKQJ suit for gambling 3N is holding only 7. Missing the jack you're going to have problems running it often enough to be annoying, even assuming you're not off 5 off the top.

PS: In context of the system, I don't think straining to open 3♦ with crap is right. Opening 3♦ on bad hands might work against bad opponents but I don't think it's an effective long term treatment.

[whereagles]

Zelandakh, on 2014-August-29, 05:49, said:

1. How can a hand with a void be textbook for a call that denies an ace or void? It is a reasonable Gambling 3NT but by no means textbook.

2. (...) I would prefer to be playing 3NT as a good 4m preempt (...) 3. It allows us to remove some of these hands from the top end without giving up on 3NT too often.

1. Everybody (even textbook authors... lol) opens AKQxxxx with 3NT. And, as you probably know from experience, most even do it with side ace/king, despite their CC saying otherwise

2. I once ran a sim on that. Odds for AKQ 7th and out are about the same as those for a classical 4m.

3. Not that it will happen too often lol.

[the hog]

4D at this vul, not playing a gambling 3NT and it is not close.

[gszes]

Bidding game too important so trotting out the ole gambling 3n here (a bid I hate
but feel compelled to use anyway since most of the time the tactical considerations
are less important then being able to bid game).

W/O the ability to bid 3n gambling, 4d seems best. Since 3n would have been unlikely
to be reached anyway (over a 3d bid) we might as well go for the maximum preempt w/o
losing 4h (or ackk 4s) as a final contract.

[foobar]

My preference would be to bid 4♦ regardless of the methods. It's barely possible that 3N will get passed out and unless pard can withstand 3N-X, we are likely to end up there anyway.

[Edit]
Missed the NV vs. vul. first time around. Changing vote to 5♦ to exert maximum pressure.

[billw55]

If this hand falls within my agreement for a gambling 3NT, I bid that.

If not, I will try 5♦. Favorable makes me feisty.

[Free]

When playing Gambling 3NT, you open 3NT, that's a no brainer imo.

When not playing Gambling in a strong ♣ system, I prefer to open with a limited opening. Partner won't get too excited, but if he has values our solid suit will compensate for the lack of power in our hand. I don't like to go past 3NT immediately with such hands, and I think this hand is way too strong for a favorable 3♦ opening.

[Siegmund]

Surprised at all the votes for 3D and 4D. If I am not playing Gambling, you can put me down for 5D-and-its-not-close, at favorable. The void is a flaw but it would not stop me from 3NT if I am playing Gambling (or from 5D).

Funny that there are now 'not-close" votes for so many different openings.

[PhantomSac]

5D is really wild, not my cup of tea though ofc it could work. I would be deciding between 1D and 4D.

[sfi]

TylerE, on 2014-August-29, 08:13, said:

At the very least every textbook I've ever read specifys an AKQJ suit for gambling 3N is holding only 7. Missing the jack you're going to have problems running it often enough to be annoying, even assuming you're not off 5 off the top.

That's not really true. You only need a 3-2 break to run the suit, so the odds are in your favour. If partner passes with a void they had best be able to conjure up 9 tricks on their own.

[manudude03]

Thanks for the replies. I decided to open 1D. Partner has somewhere in the region of AJT9x AQx J AKQx, and had the everyday auction of 1D-(1S)-P-(P)-2D-(P)-6NT, just making when partner took "insurance" by giving up a spade. Diamonds were 3-2.

[manudude03]

Thanks for the replies. I decided to open 1D. Partner has somewhere in the region of AJT9x AQx J AKQx, and had the everyday auction of 1D-(1S)-P-(P)-2D-(P)-6NT, just making when partner took "insurance" by giving up a spade. Diamonds were 3-2.

[Lord Molyb]

manudude03, on 2014-September-01, 10:37, said:

Thanks for the replies. I decided to open 1D. Partner has somewhere in the region of AJT9x AQx J AKQx, and had the everyday auction of 1D-(1S)-P-(P)-2D-(P)-6NT, just making when partner took "insurance" by giving up a spade. Diamonds were 3-2.

conveniently, gambling 3NT will get you to the cold 6♦ 100% of the time and avoid the questionable 7♦ at the same time. I think with this hand, opening 1♦ was ok.