Join Bridge Winners
History of Serious 3NT

The source I've usually seen cited for the serious 3NT convention is an article by Fred Gitelman on Improving 2/1. The way I've always played this convention, making a (non-serious) cuebid is mandatory, even if you have a terrible hand. There are just two ranges -- serious hands (which bid 3NT) and non-serious hands (which cue). This is also how the author seems to play it; he gives the following example:

West
AJ1032
KJ2
2
Q432
East
KQ4
543
AKQJ43
A
W
N
E
S
 
1
P
2
P
2
P
3
P
4
P
4N
P
5
P
6
P
P
P

Note that opener makes the "non-serious" cuebid despite being pretty close to the worst possible hand most of us would open. In fact Mr. Gitelman mentions this example as an advantage -- we get to slam here but can stop at the four-level if opener's round suits are the other way.

However, today it seems most people are playing three ranges, where the worst possible hand makes a "fast arrival" bid of 4M and a better hand (i.e. min with good controls) is required for the non-serious cue. Josh Donn taught a lesson in this style on BBO recently, and Andrew Gumperz has written a series of articles in this style as well.

So my question is -- what is the source for this alternate style? How did people decide it was better than what was presented in the original article? And are there many people who still play that a non-serious cue is mandatory if available below game (or am I in a tiny minority here)?

23 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top