[vincit]

If you do not like 3NT Gambit in standard what do you play?

[the hog]

2 options -
Either a solid major
Or
Specific Ace ask.

[Cyberyeti]

4 level preempt in a minor is played by some people who like their 4m openings to show majors.

[Codo]

I do not play it any more, because it is way to easy to defend against.

You can use it as a hand you normally had opened with 4 in a minor so that you once in a while reach 3 NT, something impossible after a 4 m opening. ^^

I like to play it as a strong one suiter with around 8,5 playing tricks and a solid suit, something like AKJTxxxx, Ax,xx,x, ah hand which sometimes causes trouble in clasic bidding because it is too strong in playing strength for a 1 Spade opening but too weak defensivly for a strong opening.

[Free]

I prefer 3NT as a good 4M opening and keep my 4-level preempts natural

[gwnn]

I think it's not so bad as everybody says it is. Bidding and rebidding your suit just doesn't feel right when you have a solid suit and a few quacks around. That said, I'd like to know how 3NT=6-5 in the majors, minimum ish works, I'd definitely like to try it.

[Vampyr]

Free, on Oct 16 2009, 12:29 PM, said:

I prefer 3NT as a good 4M opening and keep my 4-level preempts natural

This is what I play and I must say there have been very few times when I wished I'd had a gambling 3NT available.

[jjbrr]

I play gambling 3N. Don't really understand the "it's so easy to defend against" argument.

[dicklont]

jjbrr, on Oct 16 2009, 04:25 PM, said:

I play gambling 3N. Don't really understand the "it's so easy to defend against" argument.

Lead an ace, look at the dummy and you know which highcards your partner holds.
You can only misplace a Queen.
Easy.

[Cyberyeti]

I actually find 3N valuable more as an aid to slam bidding than when it's passed out. Knowing partner has 7 solid and nothing outside does allow partner to count the tricks pretty accurately.

I do remember with fondness a partner who I didn't think was capable of this sort of thing psyching 3N off ♥KQxxxxx and out. The man on lead did what you're supposed to and led ♥A and another on seeing dummy's Jx and declarer scrambled 7 tricks. 1 trick would have been enough undoubled.

[cherdanno]

I don't like gambling 3NT. I prefer 3N to show a preempt with a solid minor.

[jjbrr]

dicklont, on Oct 16 2009, 09:33 AM, said:

jjbrr, on Oct 16 2009, 04:25 PM, said:

I play gambling 3N. Don't really understand the "it's so easy to defend against" argument.

Lead an ace, look at the dummy and you know which highcards your partner holds.
You can only misplace a Queen.
Easy.

LOL

[jdonn]

Preference is 8-9 tricks with long good major (the 4♣ and 4♦ openings in namyats). But gambling is fine.

[Jlall]

I hate gambling but it's fine as a default if you wanna play 3N as something. It's better than playing it as a strong balanced hand.

[shevek]

It's not so great but seems to score well. Also gains by negative inference when opener does something else.

However, it is much better than Namyats combined with 3NT as a 4-level minor prempt. Hate to lose those natural 4C/D openings.

[dellache]

I still play the 3NT gambling with my most regular pard, and I don't have any qualms about it : it's rare (we only play 400 boards a year), and you get mixed results with it (sometimes they don't have an ace to lead, sometimes you bid an excellent slam, sometimes you/they get hammered, etc.).

My favorite way to play the 3NT opening bid is "a la Vernes" (Vernes is the guy who discovered the LTT years before LC made it popular worldwide). This method has surely scarcely been published outside of France yet, and is a component of Vernes first artificial system (La Majeure d'abord, see. Here for a brief description, ... in french).

The 3NT-Vernes opening is described as :
- a 6+m suit (any quality) ;
- no 4M
- 13 to 15 "mixed" points (MP).

Mixed points are calculated with the 4321 scale in the m-suit, and 321 scale (Ace=3) in the 3 other suits. The 7th card in your minor count as a full MP.

Example :
x KQx AQJxxx AJx is a 3NT opening (13MP) in Vernes system !!

This looks very scary but it works very well in practice in *average*. The theory behind this opening is that you need around 17,5+ MP to make 3NT. Opponents have to lead and defend blind (leading an ace is usually awful).

OK, now that you all think it's crazy. Then I just suggest you deal 100 boards with this opening w/ your favorite dealer program, and try to imagine the final results (just imagine 1. you have the right tools to pass/correct when doubled or want to play in minor -- 2. declaring slam is not really a problem -- 3. finding Major fits is alway a problem, unless responder can bid a natural NF 4M by himself). What do they lead, how do they defend ?

With my second pard, we play 3NT as "Vernes" but 16-17MP.

[TylerE]

Don't really like it, but play it because I can't think of anything better.

[blackshoe]

It is possible that other agreements may affect the meaning of 3NT. For example, if you play Namyats (4m is a "good" 4M opening), then you need some way to show a natural 4m preempt - and 3NT is usually it. I think Namyats is a useful agreement, so I like to play 3NT this way.

[TylerE]

If you're going to play NAMYATS, I think reverse is far better... 3N is a strong hand in either major, then that gives you some room to explore, and gives you natural 4m back.

[blackshoe]

Hm. Interesting idea. It sounds a bit like what Anderson and Zenkel called "Kantar 3NT". IAC, I've not played it, so I dunno. Maybe I'll give it a try, if I can find a willing partner.