In this article, we will outline the basic mechanics of the convention known as "Serious 3NT." This is a method that is particularly useful when you play a 2/1 system. It enables a partnership both to discover extra values (or the lack of them) below game, whilst also taking advantage of the extra space bidding afforded by 2/1.
We start with a look at similar auctions in both non-2/1 and 2/1 systems to see why you need a tool such as Serious 3NT. We then cover the actual mechanics of the convention.
Later in the article, we will also cover a variation of the method (Non-Serious 3NT) as well as looking at how the optimal use of the method varies depending on which suit you have agreed.
In systems where a 2/1 response is not forcing to game, responder usually has to make a non-minimum bid on his second turn to show extra values. For example, in Acol, a 2/1 response can be made on as little as 8-9 HCP. (In SAYC or Standard American/French, the minimum may be slightly stronger, but the same principles apply.) Thus:
|
Auction A Opener 1  2  |
Responder 2  2 |
In Auction A, responder shows a minimum for his original response, perhaps including three-card heart support but often with only a doubleton as he is not strong enough to bid 2NT.
|
Auction B Opener 1 2 |
Responder 2 3 |
In Auction B, responder has to jump to the three-level to show an invitational hand, i.e. 10-12 HCP, with three-card heart support.
|
Auction C Opener 1 2 |
Responder 2 4 |
In Auction C, responder shows the values for game but no more, say around 13-15 HCP.
|
Auction D Opener 1 2 |
Responder 2 2  |
In Auction D, responder has so far said nothing about heart support. Bidding the fourth suit simply creates a game-forcing auction. Responder may be seeking a spade stopper for notrumps, looking for club support, or have a heart raise in a hand too strong to describe with a limit bid.
The important point to note is that, with the exception of Auction D, responder's hand is limited to a fairly narrow range after two bids. Similarly,
|
Auction E Opener 1 2 |
Responder 2 3 |
This time, responder wants to agree opener's second suit. With a minimum hand, he can do so with a non-forcing raise to the three-level (Auction E).
|
Auction F Opener 1 2 |
Responder 2 4 |
With the values for game, though, responder has to jump to the four-level (Auction F).
How about opener?
|
Auction G Opener 1 2 |
Responder 2 |
In Auction G, opener has shown a minimum opening bid and responder can pass Two Hearts. Thus, with extra values, opener must do something more than make a minimum bid in his first suit. For example:
|
Auction H Opener 1 2NT |
Responder 2 |
|
Auction I Opener 1 3 |
Responder 2 |
With a six-card suit and extra values, opener can make a jump rebid in his suit (Auction I).
In most of these auctions, at least one of the players makes a limit bid on the first or second round. Of course, they may have to use up a significant amount of bidding room to do so (such as in Auction C above). Or, they may already be at the three-level without having yet found a sure fit (Auction I).
Of course, the more space you use up determining which suit is going to be trumps, the less room you have for deciding which level to play. After the auction ,
Now take a look at a few auctions following a game-forcing 2/1 response.
|
Auction J Opener 1 2 |
Responder 2 2 |
|
Auction K Opener 1 2 |
Responder 2 3 |
|
Auction L Opener 1 2 |
Responder 2 3 |
|
Auction M Opener 1 2NT |
Responder 2 3 |
(Auction M assumes that you are playing a strong notrump opening with your 2/1 method.)
In each of these auctions, the partnership has agreed a trump suit and established a game-forcing auction and the bidding is still at least one level below game. That sounds like great news and, of course, it is.
There is one significant cloud to this silver lining, though. In most of the auctions we looked at in the first section, one of the players had made a limit bid. That player's partner, therefore, knew whether the partnership had the combined values for game, slam, or even grand slam. (The situation is similar to when partner defined his range by opening or rebidding in notrumps.)
Let's take a more detailed look at the 2/1 auctions here.
In Auction J, K or L, opener's range is no more closely defined than it was when he opened the bidding – i.e. he could still have anything from 11-19 HCP. Remember, he didn't need to jump at his second turn to show extra values because the auction was already forcing to game. Similarly, when responder agrees opener's suit in these auctions, he could have a minimum 12-13 HCP that he showed with his initial 2/1 response, or he could hold a significantly stronger hand.
When opener rebids 2NT, he shows a balanced hand, so he is unlikely to be in the 15-17 HCP range (or he would have opened 1NT), but he could have either 12-14 or 18-19 HCP.
When we have 12 HCP opposite 13 HCP, the chances are high that we want to stop in game. With 17 facing 18, we surely want to bid to at least the six-level. So, how do we take advantage of the extra space that has been created by the game-forcing 2/1 response to sort out when one (or both) members of the partnership has extras, and when neither of us does?
Say the auction begins:
|
You 1 2 ? |
Partner 2 3 |
For the sake of argument, let's say that each of you has a HCP range of 12+ at this point.
|
Hand A K J 10 7 4 2 A J K 3 6 4 2 |
Q 9 6 K 3 Q J 4 A J 10 5 3 |
You have an automatic opening bid, a sound game-forcing 2/1 response, and a nine-card major-suit fit, but you would not want to stray beyond the four-level with this combination of two minimum hands. Indeed, on a bad day, even game may prove to be too high. However, cue-bidding your combined controls in all suits might push you precariously to the five-level. Ditto for using Blackwood whilst missing two key-cards.
Yes, on this layout, you may survive when opener just raises to Four Spades to show a minimum hand. That will not always be the case, though. Let's make responder's hand a little stronger.
|
Hand B A K J 7 4 2 K 6 J 6 3 8 5 |
Q 9 6 A 3 8 7 4 A K Q J 3 |
As you can see, the defenders can take the first three tricks in diamonds.
|
Hand C A K J 7 4 2 8 6 K 6 3 8 5 |
Q 9 6 A 3 8 7 4 A K Q J 3 |
Give opener the KK
If opener simply raises to Four Spades to show a minimum hand, responder is bound to guess to do the wrong thing at least some of the time. Sometimes he will bid on and find the layout shown in Hand B. On others he will pass and find partner with the opposite red king.
One more example before we get on to the mechanics of "Serious."
|
Hand D K Q J 7 4 2 8 6 3 A Q K 6 |
A 9 6 7 J 4 3 A Q J 7 3 2 |
This time, it is opener who has the extra values. Suppose that instead of raising to Four Spades at his third turn, opener cue-bids in clubs. Should responder, with a minimum for his 2/1 game-forcing response, now bid Four Spades to show his bare minimum or should he cue-bid his heart control?
Using "Serious" we can make use of the extra space created by playing 2/1 responses as game forcing to get deals of this type right much more often.
Having found an eight-card or longer major-suit fit, we are not going to try second-guessing the field (and ourselves) by trying to judge when we should be playing in 3NT. We are going to play in our major. Thus, 3NT is no longer needed as a natural bid (i.e. an alternative contract) and, instead, it can be utilized for some useful purpose. Let's go back to one of the auctions above:
|
You 1 2 ? |
Partner 2 3 |
Playing Serious 3NT, opener now has the following rebids available:
| Rebid | Meaning |
|---|---|
| 3NT | Extra values and serious slam interest. Responder is invited to cue-bid even with a minimum hand. |
| 4// |
A minimum (i.e. non-serious) hand that is cue-bidding only in case partner has extra values. |
Let's see how this works with the hands we saw earlier:
|
Hand A K J 10 7 4 2 A J K 3 6 4 2 |
Q 9 6 K 3 Q J 4 A J 10 5 3 |
|
You 1 2 4 Pass |
Partner 2 3 4 |
Opener shows a minimum with a diamond control but without the K.
|
Hand B A K J 7 4 2 K 6 J 6 3 8 5 |
Q 9 6 A 3 8 7 4 A K Q J 3 |
|
You 1 2 4 Pass |
Partner 2 3 4 |
Opener shows a hand with no extras by showing his cheapest control immediately. Irrespective of his strength, responder now has an easy signoff in game. Once opener bypassed both minors to cue-bid in hearts, responder knew that there were at least two diamond losers off the top.
|
Hand C A K J 7 4 2 8 6 K 6 3 8 5 |
Q 9 6 A 3 8 7 4 A K Q J 3 |
|
You 1 2 4 5 Pass |
Partner 2 3 4NT 6 |
Once he hears about a diamond control opposite, responder can count 12 tricks ,A)
|
Hand D K Q J 7 4 2 8 6 3 A Q K 6 |
A 9 6 7 J 4 3 A Q J 7 3 2 |
|
You 1 2 3NT 4 4NT 6
|
Partner 2 3 4 4 5 Pass |
This time, opener has extra values, so he starts by showing "serious" slam interest with a 3NT bid. Responder cue-bids in clubs (which partner knows must be the ace). When responder then show a heart control too, opener needs only to make sure that there are not two aces missing.
Switch responder's red suits here, and opener would discover that there are at least two heart losers without venturing beyond the four-level.
When Serious 3NT was first described by Canadian expert Fred Gitelman, the bidder (usually opener) could show extra values by advancing with 3NT but, failing that, he was obliged to show a control below game, no matter how minimum his hand.
However, there is a growing school of thought that hands should be divided into three ranges rather than two. Using this method, opener simply raises to game with an unsuitable minimum. He cue-bids controls below game with a slam-suitable minimum (for example, a minimum with either good controls or good trumps), and he starts with a Serious 3NT with significant extra values.
There are plusses and minuses to this approach. Hand B above illustrates a situation in which either showing or denying a control below game is all partner needs to get you to the right contract. The fact that the rest of your hand is terrible is not relevant.
On the plus side, little things can often make the difference between a good slam and a poor one. Do you want to reach slam needing to play this trump suit for no more than one loser?
Q x x x x opposite K J 10
Of course you do.
What, though, about
Q x x x x opposite K x x
You clearly do not want to reach slam with this as your trump suit. Yes, you have some chance of avoiding more than one trump loser, but the odds are not in your favor.
Similarly, how about slam needing four tricks from a side suit of
K x x opposite A Q x x
or
K x x opposite A J 9 x
No thanks. However, make the suit
K x x opposite A Q J x
and now there is obviously no question.
If is often not just a question of whether you hold 11 HCP or 13 HCP. Some 12 HCP hands are significantly better than others.
For example:
|
Hand E A 8 5 Q 10 J 7 5 A J 6 5 2 |
or |
Hand F A J 10 9 6 8 7 5 A Q J 5 2 |
Here are two hands, both 12 HCP, five-card club suits and three-card spade support. Which hand, though, would you rather hold?
Yes, the second hand, with the honors supporting each other, is a far better hand. Allowing you to differentiate between the quality of minimum hands can make a vital difference between reaching good slams or, more importantly, staying out of poor ones.
When Serious 3NT was first invented, it was played as described above. These days, some players have realized that there are advantages to switching the meanings of the various bids. For obvious reasons, this is called "Non-Serious 3NT." This is exactly what you would expect: 3NT shows all the hands without extra values. The immediate cue-bids, therefore, become the serious slam tries.
There are two major advantages to playing things this way around. Firstly, when you are both minimum the auction goes:
|
You 1 2 3NT* Pass |
Partner 2 3 4 |
Note that in this auction you have not given away what might be vital information about your controls, or lack of them. Remember that this is the auction of two minimum hands, when even game might be in jeopardy. The quicker you can get to game and the less help you provide for the defenders the better.
That you give away information to the opponents when you have extra values and then stop in game will rarely matter. In this scenario, they are unlikely to be able to defeat game irrespective of what they do.
The other reason for playing 3NT to show the non-serious hands is that partner still has the option of forcing you to cue-bid below game, even when your hand is minimum. Let's go back to a combination similar to one we saw earlier:
|
Hand C A K J 7 4 2 8 6 K 6 3 8 5 |
Q 9 6 A 3 8 7 4 A K Q J 3 |
Playing Serious 3NT with three ranges, the auction is likely to go
|
You 1 2 4
|
Partner 2 3 ? |
Now responder is in the familiar position of having to guess whether you have this hand, where slam is cold, or the one which has three top diamond losers if you play at the five-level.
Playing Non-Serious 3NT solves this type of problem:
|
You 1 2 3NT 4
|
Partner 2 3 4 etc. |
Opener shows a minimum hand with 3NT. Responder's Four Club bid now says, “I don't care that you are minimum, tell me about red-suit controls.”
Now, when opener cannot cue-bid in diamonds, the partnership can stop safely in Four Spades. Similarly, when opener can bid ,
Things are straightforward when your agreed suit is spades. When your suit is hearts, though, you can choose either to keep things simple or you can add a little sophistication in order to optimize the available bidding space. Let's see why this is needed.
|
You 1 2 ? |
Partner 2 3 |
You want to be able to cover six hand types and, conveniently, there are six sequences below game with which to do so. You can show a non-serious hand with a control in any side suit ,,)
|
You 1 2 ? |
Partner 2 3 |
If you simply continue to use 3NT as your "serious" move, you will find that you can now bid only five of these combinations without venturing beyond game.
|
You 1 2 3NT |
Partner 2 3 ? |
Responder cannot now show a spade control without committing to the five-level.
The answer is use the lowest available bid (i.e. Three Spades rather than 3NT) to show your "serious" hand types. Thus:
|
You 1 2 ? |
Partner 2 3 |
| Rebid | Meaning | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 |
Extra values i.e. serious slam interest. Partner's responses:
|
||||||
| 3NT | Non-serious with a spade control | ||||||
| 4 |
Non-serious with a club control but no spade control | ||||||
| 4 |
Non-serious with a diamond control but no black-suit control |
By effectively switching the meaning of the Three Spade and 3NT bids, you gain the extra space needed so that all six hand types can again be shown without committing to the five-level.
The main reason that "serious/non-serious" works as described in the preceding sections is because of the assumption that you are always going to play game (or slam) in your major-suit fit. Thus, 3NT is available as a conventional bid because it is assumed you never (or rarely) want to play in 3NT.
The basic concept behind serious/non-serious is equally useful, and perhaps even more so, when your suit is a minor. How about these auctions?
|
You 1 2 |
Partner 2 3 |
|
You 1 3 |
Partner 2 ? |
Sorting out whether one or both of you has extra values at a low level is just as important in these sequences as it is in those auctions we have been discussing. The problem, though, is that 3NT is still very much a potential contract when our agreed suit is a minor. Indeed, it is probably where we want to play more than half the time.
Most partnerships use the three-level bids to sort out stoppers for notrumps. Thus, in either of these auctions:
| Response | Meaning |
|---|---|
| 3 |
Heart stopper, no spade stopper |
| 3 |
Spade stopper, no heart stopper |
| 3NT | Stoppers in both majors |
That is relatively straightforward because we have the space to bid either of the unclaimed suits at the three-level. What about when we can bid only one of them?
|
You 1 3 |
Partner 2 |
|
You 1 3 |
Partner 2 ? |
Notice the major difference between these two sequences. In the first, you are still able to bid either of the unclaimed suits below 3NT. Thus, in the first auction you can bid Three Diamonds to suggest doubt about a heart stopper or Three Hearts to ask for help in diamonds.
In the second sequence, though, you do not have that luxury. There are now three hand types you want to be able to show (spade stopper no club stopper, club stopper no spade stopper, stoppers in both suits) but only two bids (Three Spades and 3NT) with which to show them.
What this means is that you can either use Three Spades to show a spade stopper and no club stopper, or to ask for a spade stopper, implying that you have clubs stopped. With both of the other two hand types, you have to bid 3NT. So, which way around should you play it?
I suspect that most players, without specific discussion, would bid Three Spades to show something in spades. However, move around the table into LHO's seat for a moment. He hears the auction:
|
You 1 3 Pass |
Partner 2 3NT |
If he has similar holdings in the black suits, which one do you think he is likely to lead?
Wouldn't most players lead the unbid major? Does it not make sense, therefore, assuming that you will sometimes have to bid 3NT with only one of the suits stopped, that suit should be spades. Thus, when you have a club stopper and no spade stopper, you would prefer to be able to bid Three Spades (asking for a stopper) than just have to punt 3NT.
Not that checking you have all suits stopped necessarily solves the problem anyway. Consider this pair of hands:
|
A J 10 4 2 A K 6 8 10 6 5 4 |
6 J 7 3 A J 4 K Q J 7 3 2 |
|
Opener 1 3 ? |
Responder 2 3 |
Do you not think that a large majority of players would now bid 3NT with opener's hand? Partner has shown a diamond stopper and we have a double stopper in hearts and weak clubs. Looking at both hands, though, it clear that we want to play this combination in clubs: 3NT is likely to fail, but game in clubs is almost certain to make.
You might conclude from this discussion that the question of checking on side-suit stoppers for the purposes of playing in 3NT is of questionable value. So…
Bidding space in these auctions is extremely limited. It would seem, though, that it is worthwhile devoting one bid to the "serious" cause. Let's see how this might work:
|
You 1 3 |
Partner 2 ? |
| Response | Meaning |
|---|---|
| 3 |
Serious |
| 3 |
Non-serious but doubt about 3NT |
| 3NT | Non-serious but doubt about a 5-level contract |
Using the lowest available bid to show extra values leaves maximum room for slam exploration. This is particularly useful when playing IMPs, since the 3NT/5m question can virtually be ignored (with at least one member of the partnership holding extra values, you expect to be able to make either game). Thus, you can devote the bidding space to answering the game/slam question.
In sequences such as the one above, where there is another bid below 3NT, you can differentiate further between types of minimum hands. For example, compare responder's hand above with these alternatives:
|
Hand G 6 2 Q J 3 K Q 10 A J 6 5 4 |
or |
Hand H 6 J 7 3 A J 4 K Q J 7 3 2 |
|
You 1 3 |
Partner 2 ? |
I would not suggest that adopting a serious/non-serious method when your suit is a minor will mean that your partner will make the winning decision on every hand. It would seem to increase the chances, though, in a situation that for many partnerships is very much hit-and-miss using traditional methods.
© Jeff Tang. All Rights Reserved.