[barmar]

ArtK78, on 2011-March-24, 08:20, said:

I find it kind of funny that the original poster said that gambling 3NT came up only once in about 750 deals. I have been playing for about 40 years, and I can say that the opportunity to open a gambling 3NT has come up about 5 times over that entire period.

I've only been playing about half that long, but my experience is similar to yours. I think that's because I was also taught more stringent requirements for the bid: the suit should be headed by AKQJ, so that you have a very good chance to run the suit opposite a singleton. AKQxxxx requres partner to have a doubleton or the suit to break 3-2.

And not only do you have to have the right hand type, but you have to be the one to open the bidding. So throw out half the boards, when you're in 3rd or 4th seat (with a passed partner, it's unlikely he'll have enough side stoppers). And throw out the boards where you're in 2nd seat and RHO opens.

[chasetb]

bluecalm, on 2011-March-24, 08:09, said:

It also allows them to bid freely 4♣/4♦/4♥ and have 2 meaning for the double (direct and delayed).
Imo this convention sucks.

I usually respect your opinion, but this time I feel you are dead wrong. They rarely come up, and most people don't even know how to bid over it when their partners open it. In my two years of playing bridge (5000+ deals), I have had a weak Gambling 3NT. It gave us a swing because partner was in 6♦= ; the LOLs at the other table were in 3NT making 5. Because it was unfavorable vulnerability, I think we would have gotten there anyway by me opening 3♦ on x xxx AKQxxxx xx with him, as he is aggressive and plays well.

I have watched almost 2000 more hands on Vugraph, and only once was it opened on there - in TGRs a pair got to 6♦= (his partner bid it) for a flat board when the other table made it there without Gambling 3NT. I have had 3 medium Gambling 3NT hands in that time, and used it once - we got to 6♣+1, but only because 2 more LOLs didn't open 2♠.

You can freely DBL or bid 4♣/4♦/4♥/4♠, and give each of them different meanings as well over a Gambling 3NT. It's harder to assign meanings to them over a strong 4M pre-empt; after all you don't know WHAT Major Opener has, and partner is allowed to pass the 3NT bid. Opener is also promising a little defense outside the major, should those silly opponents try to bid on.

I play it as a strong 4M pre-empt (8.0-9.0 tricks, A or KQ or KJx outside) in all but 4th seat, and it has come up 5 times I can think of while playing, not to mention once in the Vanderbilt finals. I go back to a strong Gambling 3NT in 4th seat; it worked in a home game the one time I was able to use it.

EDIT - I think the 3NT as Ace asking is an interesting idea, and even if you completely disagree with what I said above, you can't say that it wouldn't be useful.

[bluecalm]

Quote

I have watched almost 2000 more hands on Vugraph, and only once was it opened on there

I am not saying gambling 3NT is frequent.

Quote

You can freely DBL or bid 4♣/4♦/4♥/4♠, and give each of them different meanings as well over a Gambling 3NT.

So what ? When you have gambling 3NT opener your choices are either 1m or 3m so they will get their chance too when you have 4♠ opener and you open it with 3NT (or 4D or w/e) then they get free heart showing bid. They can even agree that dbl is weakish 2suiter at least 5-5 and get a free competition chance which they wouldn't get if you just open 4♠.

Quote

It's harder to assign meanings to them over a strong 4M pre-empt; after all you don't know WHAT Major Opener has

You just play them all as natural and dbl as t/o to one major. This way you get a chance to bid your suit at 4level which you normally don't get. Direct double is also better becaue it's less risky (cause they rarely want to play 3NT and you won't watch them taking overtricks in 4M doubled as it sometimes the case after 4M opener).

Quote

- I think the 3NT as Ace asking is an interesting idea, and even if you completely disagree with what I said above, you can't say that it wouldn't be useful.

I think it's useful.
My point is that:

Playing gambling 3NT > playing nothing
Playing 3NT as M preempt < playing nothing
Playing 3NT as ace askign > playing nothing obviously

Now the question is if gambling is better than ace asking. I have completely no idea. The hands are not frequent enough for me to bother with this question. I just don't want to play conventions which improve my opponents chances over natural simple bidding. Which one of the useful one my partner picks is fine by me.

[cloa513]

gnasher, on 2011-March-23, 16:54, said:

1♦-1♠
2♦-3NT

The main argument against a gambling 3NT is that it preempts our side more than the opponents. A corollary is that if you don't open 3NT you should open at the one-level.

If you don't want to open this 1♦, you should continue to play the Gambling 3NT, rather than widening the range of 3♦.

Edit: I'm usually reluctant to open 3NT, but I'd do it on this hand, because I have exactly what partner will play me for. The hands where I'd avoid opening 3NT are the ones with a side card - even a queen - because that turns it into a full-value opening, and partner will never be able to find out about the side card.

Of course, North's hand could be considerable worse and 3NT is reasonabele such as ♣Q98x ♦xx ♥Axx♠Axxx
A suggest would be to make 2♣ rebid conventional and forcing and cover this type of hand in the patterns, a number of hands may need to be rebid 1NT instead of 2♣ with 5/4 in the minors.