[sam998]

We want to use 3C reply to 1NT as a Gerber Ace ask. responder goes 3d =0, 3h = 1,3s=2, 3NT = 3

The asker then has a very quick answer as to whether a potential slam is on or whether to rest at 3NT.

This is not in the ACBL encyclopaedia or any other book, so can this convention be allowed ? and if so do you think as we do that it have merit ?

Chris

[hrothgar]

sam998, on 2016-May-02, 05:02, said:

This is not in the ACBL encyclopaedia or any other book, so can this convention be allowed ?

Chris

Yes

Quote

and if so do you think as we do that it have merit ?

No

[mr1303]

What Hrothgar said.

[hrothgar]

Here is a somewhat more nuanced reply.

The convention that you want to play is sanctioned under two different sections of the GCC (both are under the Responses and Rebids section)

Quote

9. CALLS THAT ASK for aces, kings queens, singletons, voids or trump
quality and responses thereto.

and

Quote

CONVENTIONAL RESPONSES WHICH GUARANTEE GAME FORCING
OR BETTER VALUES. May NOT be part of a relay system.

As for technical merit:

Assume for the moment that you want to devote a response for hands who only care about the number of Aces held by the 1NT opener.
Presumably, you are interested in playing in slam if you have enough Aces and otherwise you're going to play in game in NT.

A Gerber style 4♣ response allows you to stop in 4NT. Its true, that you have bid past 3N, however, if responder has the right hand to bid Gerber, then 4NT should be a perfectly acceptable contract.

Based on this simple observation, I think that it makes much more sense to use your 3♣ response to show something else. Add in the fact that it is really useful to be able to explore for things like, oh I don't know, lets say fit and shape, and length and ...

[jnichols]

In the ACBL it is legal at all levels.
It does require an immediate alert.

[helene_t]

You might want to use 3♠ as gerber as you can still stop in 4♥ opposite two aces, then. Being able stop in 3NT should not be an objective, though, as you can always stop in 4NT.

[johnu]

helene_t, on 2016-May-02, 11:02, said:

You might want to use 3♠ as gerber as you can still stop in 4♥ opposite two aces, then. Being able stop in 3NT should not be an objective, though, as you can always stop in 4NT.

Alternatively, you can use 2♣ as Gerber and stop in 2NT if you don't have enough aces.

[mycroft]

Not that anyone needs to care, but there's a third reason "Baby Gerber" is legal GCC:

Quote

RESPONSES AND REBIDS, 10: ALL CALLS AFTER A NATURAL NOTRUMP opening bid or direct overcall...[except if 1NT is an "unacceptable range" where no conventions are allowed]

As for merit: I'm well known for playing No Gerber Ever. You get one hand a year, maybe, where there's no better call than a straight-ace ask after 1NT. I can think of 5 things more useful and more common than wasting a bid for that. I'm sure that I could double that for 1NT-3♣ - and I'm also famous for saying "I don't care what our 3-level bids [over 1NT] are, as long as we have an agreement. They never come up anyway."

[barmar]

mycroft, on 2016-May-02, 12:45, said:

I'm also famous for saying "I don't care what our 3-level bids [over 1NT] are, as long as we have an agreement. They never come up anyway."

I'm famous for saying that if you discussed whether to play X or Y, and you decide on X, Y will come up. It's kind of a Murphy's Law of bridge agreements.

[Vampyr]

mycroft, on 2016-May-02, 12:45, said:

Not that anyone needs to care, but there's a third reason "Baby Gerber" is legal GCC:
As for merit: I'm well known for playing No Gerber Ever. You get one hand a year, maybe, where there's no better call than a straight-ace ask after 1NT. I can think of 5 things more useful and more common than wasting a bid for that.

What are you using 4♠ for?

[nullve]

johnu, on 2016-May-02, 11:49, said:

Alternatively, you can use 2♣ as Gerber and stop in 2NT if you don't have enough aces.

On a very liberal reading of the GCC, can't 2♣ even be an ace-asking fert?

GCC said:

STRENGTH SHOWING OPENING AT THE TWO LEVEL OR HIGHER that asks for aces, kings, queens, singletons, voids or trump quality and responses thereto.

[mycroft]

Vampyr, on 2016-May-02, 15:31, said:

What are you using 4♠ for?

Me? Currently, "I want to play 4♠" - as opposed to 4♦, which means "I want you to play 4♠". But I usually play a weak NT, so it's reasonably frequent that we want to hog the hand.

I will also note that I play Keri most of the time - so I get my RKC in any suit in, short of 3NT (almost always). And, as it turns out, we *have* a straight-ace ask bid available - 4NT. No, it's never come up either :-) But I was talking in general, and also I was assuming a strong NT.

Standard? If I had to play straight Texas, I'd play 4♣ as preemptive, and probably 4♠ the same (hoping to avoid 1NT-p-4♥-X;4♠-5♥). Still more frequent than Gerber.

But frankly, playing pickup, my goal is to shut out round-1 ace-asks altogether, even if it's not replaced by anything. This will, on average, improve my score.

[mycroft]

Totally offtopic:

And now I'm thinking: well, if 2♣ is 4-card Stayman, and 3♣ is 5-card Stayman, then shouldn't 4♣ be 6-card Stayman?

[blackshoe]

ROFL!

[WellSpyder]

mycroft, on 2016-May-02, 17:21, said:

And now I'm thinking: well, if 2♣ is 4-card Stayman, and 3♣ is 5-card Stayman, then shouldn't 4♣ be 6-card Stayman?

Now there's a thought! Of course it might be relatively rare that you have a hand where you know what to do on the rare occasions when partner DOESN'T have a 6-card major. But if you do, what could be more perfect than having this convention available??

[1eyedjack]

Perhaps it would be helpful, not least to sam998, were (s)he to post a hand where the suggested convention would be more useful than other methods

[Zelandakh]

Vampyr, on 2016-May-02, 15:31, said:

What are you using 4♠ for?

I think the 2 most common uses are natural and Baron. Both seem to me to be more useful than Gerber in a well-designed structure.