[Zelandakh]

The 2NT opening has been discussed to death. Nearly everyone round here that does not play it as natural plays it as a preempt with both minors, including me. There are plenty of other options around though and I think I posted most of them in the last thread.

The 3NT opening has also been discussed to death. I quite like playing it as a good 4m preempt because it unloads the 3m opening somewhat but the good 4M preempt is much more popular. We have had at least 3 or 4 threads on this just in the last year so should be easy enough to find one of them. Inter alia, other options here are a running minor (Gambling) with or without something outside; any 4m opening; Namyats in either major; some sort of 2-suiter; or a specific ace ask.

What you play a 4m opening as depends to a large degree on what meaning 3NT has been assigned. I have tried Namyats but prefer natural. I suppose you could potentially play this as an extreme (6-5) major-minor 2-suiter too if you were willing to channel the 4m preempts via 3NT.

A 4M opening must surely be natural and I do not know of anyone that plays it as something else. This is just too big a weapon to leave in the hangar. In combination with the "strong 4M" 3NT opening it also has a reasonable degree of definition, although lack of definition is a weapon all of its own when preempting.

The 4NT opening is another one that gets discussed to death on BBF. There have also been numerous threads on this in the last year. The traditional meaning is a specific ace ask. Several top pairs use ot as some kind of extreme 2-suiter. I have not seen hrothgar's idea before but it seems to make sense as an alternative.

5m openings must also be natural imho. I have had numerous great hands after opening a natural, undisciplined 5m. Weak opponents either pass or double. Always. 5 level overcalls just do not exist. Nor does the idea of taking out the double. They also do not really understand what sort of hand would open 5m since 8-9 tricks is "obviously" a 2m opener. I strongly recommend not playing this conventionally and not restricting it to the odd 9 card suit.

[32519]

This post is an attempted summary of what others use the 3NT bid for:

PhilKing, on 2012-November-07, 12:54, said:

I don't play it myself, but 3NT showing a hand too good to open 4M is very popular amongst the top American players.

hrothgar, on 2012-November-07, 19:09, said:

3NT Opening: Good 4 Level Preempt in either major

relknes, on 2012-November-07, 19:56, said:

3N is a "gambling 3N" showing a solid 7+ minor and no outside A or K.

gwnn, on 2012-November-08, 03:01, said:

It is the smaller cousin of 3NT=6H, 5+m, weakish.

Zelandakh, on 2012-November-08, 05:04, said:

The 3NT opening has also been discussed to death.
I quite like playing it as a good 4m preempt because it unloads the 3m opening somewhat but the good 4m preempt is much more popular.
Inter alia, other options here are a running minor (Gambling) with or without something outside; any 4m opening; Namyats in either major; some sort of 2-suiter; or a specific ace ask.

Other possibilities could be:
1. 3NT as a natural 24-25 HCP hand. Most would put these hand types through the strong 2♣ bid.
2. 5/5 or 6/5 in the minors and 11+ HCP (versus 2NT showing 5/5 in the minors and 5-10 HCP)

Of these options, I still need to decide which one fits in best with the rest of my agreements.

[gwnn]

2 words 32519... Goo gle.

http://www.bridgebas...r-gambling-3nt/

and millions of other threads. It doesn't take a PhD in internet research to find these threads.

[Vampyr]

32519, on 2012-November-08, 09:14, said:

Of these options, I still need to decide which one fits in best with the rest of my agreements.

I beg you not to keep us in suspense for too long.

[jeffford76]

PhilKing, on 2012-November-07, 12:54, said:

I don't play it myself, but 3NT showing a hand too good to open 4M is very popular amongst the top American players.

It might be more popular among the not-top American players too, but it's not allowed in most ACBL events. (It's not on the General Convention Chart.)

[Cascade]

3NT specific ace ask

4NT both minors at least 5=6

5m - about 9 tricks.

I play almost all preempts reasonably constructive except at favourable vulnerability.

[neilkaz]

Cascade, on 2012-November-08, 13:38, said:

3NT specific ace ask

I like this and want some PD's to play it for the rare hand where nothing else matters. Are there any special responses and how do you then ask for kings and is there room to ask for a specific queen needed for a grand or to assure 7NT rather than 7m?

.. thx... neilkaz ..

[Cascade]

neilkaz, on 2012-November-08, 15:18, said:

I like this and want some PD's to play it for the rare hand where nothing else matters. Are there any special responses and how do you then ask for kings and is there room to ask for a specific queen needed for a grand or to assure 7NT rather than 7m?

.. thx... neilkaz ..

There are various options, some are listed

i/ 4♣ none or none or clubs then relay with 4♦ to find out

ii/ 4NT any two or 4NT club ace with 5♣ etc showing two - perhaps colour, rank, odd

iii/ 4NT can be a specific king ask or you could always give up playing in the next higher step and use a 1-step relay for specific kings. With kings there is more chance of ambiguity when showing two but perhaps it is still worth the risk.

iv/ If you gave up the next step again you could always relay for queens.

4NT/5NT should always be free as a relay, however there don't seem to be many bad cases for relaying for kings and then queens.

[deannz]

My half a cents worth.

5m = preempt
4N = good preempt (doesn;t come up often but clarifies 5m) as per Preempts from A-Z.
3N = 5+/5+ majors weak.

Other option = 3NT = Kabel specific ace ask.

Dean./

[Zelandakh]

neilkaz, on 2012-November-08, 15:18, said:

I like this and want some PD's to play it for the rare hand where nothing else matters. Are there any special responses and how do you then ask for kings and is there room to ask for a specific queen needed for a grand or to assure 7NT rather than 7m?

Simple would be:-
4♣ = no ace (then 4♦ asks for specific kings)
4♦♥♠ = ace of suit bid (then 4NT = specific kings)
4NT = ♣A (then 5NT = specific king ask)
5♣ = any 2 from ♦A, ♥A, ♠A (then 5NT = specific king ask)
5♦ = ♣A and a major suit ace (then 5NT = specific king ask)
5♥ = ♣A and ♦A (then 5NT = specific king ask)

Exclusion for the 2 ace responses is better than positive since it is less likely to mean getting overboard.

[Mbodell]

neilkaz, on 2012-November-08, 15:18, said:

I like this and want some PD's to play it for the rare hand where nothing else matters. Are there any special responses and how do you then ask for kings and is there room to ask for a specific queen needed for a grand or to assure 7NT rather than 7m?

.. thx... neilkaz ..

When I play it (quite possibly not optimal):

4♣ - 0 A (4nt asks for specific K)
4♦/♥/♠ - specific A (4nt asks for specific K)
4nt - ♣A (5nt specific K ask)
5♣/♦/♥/♠ - This A and the one touching above it (5nt specific K ask)
5nt - two non-touching A
6♣ - 3A

Over 4nt specific K ask 5♣ is none, other 5 suits are that specific one, 5nt is ♣, 6 level show that suit and the one above, 6nt shows 2 non-touching.
Over 5nt specific K ask, 6♣ is none, other 6 level bids show one specific K, 6nt shows clubs, and there is no way to show more than one K.

I don't think you ever need specific Q, as specific A is rare enough, and if you need specific A and specific K, you needed too much to have a specific Q.

[32519]

After reading what others had to say in this thread, how about the following refinement?
1. 4♣/4♦/4/♥/4♠ all show a hand within 2 tricks of making vul and within 3 tricks nv.
2. Then channel all the stronger single suited GF hands through the 3NT bid. These would be all the hands expecting to make. The hand can be majors or minors (7-4 holding as suggested by hrothgar also possible; the defining element is that you expect the contract to make). After 3NT, 4♣ asks for the suit. Bid it if it is ♦/♥/♠. If ♣, then bid 4NT to confirm ♣. Whatever the response to the 4♣ asking bid is, partner either signs off in game or makes a slam try with the appropriate hand.

Any thoughts?

[hrothgar]

32519, on 2012-November-10, 05:45, said:

After reading what others had to say in this thread, how about the following refinement?
1. 4♣/4♦/4/♥/4♠ all show a hand within 2 tricks of making vul and within 3 tricks nv.
2. Then channel all the stronger single suited GF hands through the 3NT bid. These would be all the hands expecting to make. The hand can be majors or minors (7-4 holding as suggested by hrothgar also possible; the defining element is that you expect the contract to make). After 3NT, 4♣ asks for the suit. Bid it if it is ♦/♥/♠. If ♣, then bid 4NT to confirm ♣. Whatever the response to the 4♣ asking bid is, partner either signs off in game or makes a slam try with the appropriate hand.

Any thoughts?

I think that your 3NT bid is badly overloaded

I think that your 4♣ bid is un-necessary.
If you can't infer partner's suit, then you probably don't need to know it.

[Gerben42]

32519, on 2012-November-07, 09:01, said:

I’m looking for ideas from others for alternate uses for the following high level opening bids:
1. 2NT
2. 3NT
3. 4♣
4. 4♦
5. 4♥
6. 4♠
7. 4NT
8. 5♣

I'm not convinced that my current agreements make optimal use of these high level opening bids. By nature, all of them are pre-emptive. But what or how do others use them? Hopefully I will find something more effective than what I am currently doing.

Thanks in advance.

2NT I prefer as 20 - 22 NT If you don't need that (i.e. you play Strong ♣ or similar), you can play it as ♥ + minor (5 - 5).

3NT: Good 4♥/♠ opening
4 of a suit: Natural
4NT: Both minors
5m: Natural
5M: Two tricks better than 4M, one better than 3NT.

[32519]

32519, on 2012-November-10, 05:45, said:

After reading what others had to say in this thread, how about the following refinement?
1. 4♣/4♦/4/♥/4♠ all show a hand within 2 tricks of making vul and within 3 tricks nv.
2. Then channel all the stronger single suited GF hands through the 3NT bid. These would be all the hands expecting to make. The hand can be majors or minors (7-4 holding as suggested by hrothgar also possible; the defining element is that you expect the contract to make). After 3NT, 4♣ asks for the suit. Bid it if it is ♦/♥/♠. If ♣, then bid 4NT to confirm ♣. Whatever the response to the 4♣ asking bid is, partner either signs off in game or makes a slam try with the appropriate hand.

Any thoughts?

hrothgar, on 2012-November-10, 06:32, said:

I think that your 4♣ bid is un-necessary. If you can't infer partner's suit, then you probably don't need to know it.

A further refinement (or better refinement?) of this could be something like this –
1. A direct bid of any suit other than 4♣ can be used to show the A and K in the suit bid with nothing to show anywhere else. The 3NT opener can use this information and bid game or slam directly now depending on whether the suit shown fits the rest of his hand e.g. AK opposite a void helps nothing. However AK opposite 2 small cards in the suit makes the slam easy.
2. A direct bid of 4NT can be used to show any two Aces and nothing else. Opener’s decision will now be to bid the small slam or the grand slam as the 3NT opening bid already showed a hand strong enough to bid game on its own.
3. The 4♣ bid would then show a hand with either, a) no slam potential wanting to signoff in game, or, b) a hand with an A and K in two different suits still leaving the door open for a slam try but able to signoff at the 5-level if necessary.

Any thoughts?

[32519]

Vampyr, on 2012-November-08, 10:28, said:

I beg you not to keep us in suspense for too long.

Your anxious wait is over. Refer to my previous post in this thread to see what I will be using the 3NT bid for. Through constructive posting, I managed to figure out something that I intend experimenting with for the 3NT bid.

[32519]

This (not so) crazy idea may actually work. This completely random deal recently came up at the table. This was the actual hand and the bidding:

---

12 tricks were made.
1. West led the ♦9 to the King
2. ♠5 to the Ace
3. ♣2 to the Queen taken by the Ace.
As West is unable to draw the last trump on table, 12 tricks are there for the taking, even if a bit fortuitous.

Now if only I had a partner who was also bidding this new idea. Then the suggested auction would have gone something like this:
P-3NT-P-4♣
P-4♦-P-4♠
P-4NT-P-6♦
P-P-X-All Pass

3NT = a hand willing to bid game on its own
4♣ = What is your suit?
4♦ = My suit
4♠ = An Ace and a King in two different suits
4NT = I am worried about a bad ♦ break. Signoff in 5♦ with 0-1 ♦. Bid the slam with 2+♦
6♦ = I got 2+♦

[gwnn]

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

[manudude03]

32519, on 2012-November-10, 09:44, said:

This (not so) crazy idea may actually work. This completely random deal recently came up at the table. This was the actual hand and the bidding:

---

Now if only I had a partner who was also bidding this new idea. Then the suggested auction would have gone something like this:
P-3NT-P-4♣
P-4♦-P-4♠
P-4NT-P-6♦
P-P-X-All Pass

3NT = a hand willing to bid game on its own
4♣ = What is your suit?
4♦ = My suit
4♠ = An Ace and a King in two different suits
4NT = I am worried about a bad ♦ break. Signoff in 5♦ with 0-1 ♦. Bid the slam with 2+♦
6♦ = I got 2+♦

Oops (btw what reason does East have for doubling 6D in your auction anyway?)

Also, one of the big things about 3N showing a good pre-empt is that it allows you to play 3N. Your scheme doesn't seem to allow that.

[antonylee]

I'd rather not be in 6♦ on that deal anyways