[pclayton]

fred, on Apr 26 2005, 03:22 PM, said:

Jlall, on Apr 26 2005, 10:01 PM, said:

fred, on Apr 26 2005, 03:30 PM, said:

I have a theory that a 3NT opening should show a hand for which one of the following is true:

1) There is a good chance that 3NT from your side of the table is a reasonable contract.

or

2) There is almost no chance that your partnership belongs in 3NT.

Interesting, I guess by this logic reverse namyats is better than namyats

I don't even know what reverse namyats is

I think normal namyats is that 4C and 4D are used to show "strong preempts" in the corresponding major. In my experience playing against this convention I have not been very impressed with the results that my opponents have had. A recurring theme is that when the responder has a moderate hand he has no idea if it is safe to try for slam or not because he doesn't know if a side suit holding of something like KQx is facing a void or something like Ax. There is little room to try for slam and the 5-level is often not safe if the hands fit poorly. Opening at the 1-level and autosplintering after a (semi-)forcing 1NT response has to a be a better way of bidding pairs of hands in this family.

I realize I have greatly simplified things, ignored tactical considerations completely, and made some assumptions about the kind of hands that people open mamyats with. Furthermore, as I have said, I have never tried this convention myself. My point is that it hasn't worked very well for my opponents.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Fred - 2 years ago I heard about this treatment that was being used by Grant Baze. We've had the discussion on here prior and someone else mentioned that its older than that.

[pclayton]

Hannie, on Apr 26 2005, 01:37 PM, said:

Could anybody post reasonable follow-ups to a reverse-namyats 3NT opening?

Hans:

My original post:

http://forums.bridge...?showtopic=4953

I still play it pretty similar to this.