[nekthen]

Partner opened 3N (gambling) opps interfered with 4♠, my bid.
I chose 4N

Partner's hand

---

What now?

[Tramticket]

I have had this auction more than once. We definitely want it to play.

[FelicityR]

The 4NT bidder already knows partner's hand. Maximum one ace. So it's always going to be to play in this auction. 5♣ is the pick a minor bid here.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

The option missing: a good raise to 5m, in which case the direct 5m
can be made on weaker hands, it would also set up a FP seq.

This would be the meaning for us, from default agreements, ..., if you
dont have this agreement, it is to play.

Given the colors, to play is certainly a sensible option, on the other hand,
I rarely pick up hands, that want to make a gambling 3NT opening bid, i.e.
and the follow up auction makes it even less likely that I will encounter this
more than once in my lifetime, i.e. the default agreement is fine.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[pescetom]

Tramticket, on 2019-June-12, 05:44, said:

I have had this auction more than once. We definitely want it to play.

More than twice?
I can live with any solution, given the infrequency the important thing is to remember which.
FWIW I slightly prefer 4N as RKC for the unidentified minor, with 5♣ pass/correct.

[Stephen Tu]

The way most people play gambling, rkc response is already known. 2 with.

[pescetom]

Stephen Tu, on 2019-June-12, 15:44, said:

The way most people play gambling, rkc response is already known. 2 with.

Quite right, so that makes no sense. Asking for a side Queen sounds a bit academic, so I change my vote to natural then.

[nekthen]

The whole hand

From a top to a bottom in one bid

---

Sadly opps have 3 top tricks, with a stiff spade I could understand pulling but I think you should treat 4N as natural and trust p.
You can always win the pm if you pass!

OK actually 44% as many were in 5♦ doubled

The errors continued into the play when South cashed her aces and, not wishing to set up Q♠ if East has a singleton, played a heart at trick 3.

Partner can now run the diamonds keeping the Q♠ and AQ♣ and S is squeezed on the last ♦
Sadly, partner did not see this line and played to drop the K♣

[Tramticket]

I wouldn't have bid 4NT with that West hand. You can't be sure that you are supplying 3 tricks, to go with partner's promised 7 and you have reasonable hopes of defence against 4♠. 4NT looks like A AXXXX XX AXXXX.

[nekthen]

Tramticket, on 2019-June-13, 05:52, said:

I wouldn't have bid 4NT with that West hand. You can't be sure that you are supplying 3 tricks, to go with partner's promised 7 and you have reasonable hopes of defence against 4♠. 4NT looks like A AXXXX XX AXXXX.

Given South has all the outstanding points, I thought it a reasonable gamble

[eagles123]

nekthen, on 2019-June-13, 06:19, said:

Given South has all the outstanding points, I thought it a reasonable gamble

well that's a pretty wild assumption why can't the hand be

---

for example

ps this whole topic seems like an attempt to show how crap your partner is, which seems to me like rather poor form.

[msjennifer]

P_Marlowe, on 2019-June-12, 07:35, said:

Hi,

The option missing: a good raise to 5m, in which case the direct 5m
can be made on weaker hands, it would also set up a FP seq.

This would be the meaning for us, from default agreements, ..., if you
dont have this agreement, it is to play.

Given the colors, to play is certainly a sensible option, on the other hand,
I rarely pick up hands, that want to make a gambling 3NT opening bid, i.e.
and the follow up auction makes it even less likely that I will encounter this
more than once in my lifetime, i.e. the default agreement is fine.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Sir,I fully agree with you .These aspects have to be kept in mind when your partner uses this treatment (4NT is to play) or he is a stranger .

[nekthen]

eagles123, on 2019-June-13, 07:53, said:

well that's a pretty wild assumption why can't the hand be

---

for example

ps this whole topic seems like an attempt to show how crap your partner is, which seems to me like rather poor form.

Pretty pointless as my partner is not named and does not go on bbo. I just wanted to see if my peers agreed it was to play. Of course, it is much easier to see the squeeze afterwards, I do not know if I would have found the play as declarer.

I agree its a gamble, but 4♠ is probably not enough off. At MPs I think the possible results favour 4N, maybe at IMPS pass is the right action

[msjennifer]

Sir,not going by the results ,it is rather unfortunate that partner chose to open 3NT with an Eight card RUNNING suit AND THE HQ outside.Sone may open this hand 1D and some less lucky 4/5 D.

[nekthen]

My partner is old school and would probably be horrified by the idea that a gambling 3N is now acceptable with AKQxxxx. I bet a straw poll at my club would find the majority agreeing that an 8 card running suit is required. How times change!