|
Gerber
1NT 4♣ (and 2NT 4♣) are generally used as Ace-asking, the so-called Gerber convention. This allows 1NT 4NT to be "quantitative", asking Opener to bid slam if he likes his hand. We'd say that useful occasions for Gerber come up quite rarely, and that many players over-use it, asking for Aces when they would be better off asking Partner opinion (with a 4NT invitation).
There are various methods of responding to Gerber, are you and your Partner playing the same one?
1st October, 2008 Both Vul
As South, holding that lovely 19-count opposite a 12-14 Partner, are you good enough for slam? We’d rate it borderline between insisting on slam and inviting to slam, so we’ll let you decide that one for yourself. But let us suppose that you are an optimistic soul and that you decide that you are going to slam regardless. Well, at least, let us make that “almost regardless” it’s quite possible that there are two missing Aces. So, the optimistic South might want to try Gerber first, in which case here is a set of modified Gerber responses that is worth consideration: 4♦ 1 or 4 Aces 4♥ 0 or 3 Aces 4♠ 2 Aces with a minimum 4NT 2 Aces with a maximum As can be seen, these responses are influenced by the 1430 responses to Roman Key Card, and, if in use in the featured auction, would, as it happens, allow North to show 2 Aces and also warn Partner of a rotten hand.
3rd September, 2008 N-S Vul
South’s 2♥ was game-forcing, and North might have shown a good suit earlier by rebidding 3♠ instead of 2♠. However, she reasonably decided to go slowly in order to find out more about Partner’s hand. Next, South’s jump to 3NT shows some extras, as with a minimum No Trump hand she would have bid 2NT. Is 4♣ Gerber here? That’s a matter for partnership agreement, and much as we think that Gerber is an overused convention, it’s rather useful on this deal!
Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that 4♣ is Gerber. What are the responses? Most common is the 0/1/2/3 approach, but here’s an interesting alternative (no doubt influenced by the 1430 responses to Roman Key Card Blackwood): - 4♦ is 1 or 4 Aces - 4♥ is 0 or 3 Aces - 4♠ is 2 Aces and a minimum - 4NT is 2 Aces and a maximum Assuming that Partner shows 2 Aces (maximum or otherwise) then North can reasonably try 7NT.
17th May, 2006 Board 3 E-W Vul
North’s 2♥ was DONT, showing both majors, and putting East in an interesting situation. 6NT looks like the most likely spot, at least it would be if Partner were kind enough to hold the A♥ or K♥, and if the partnership is not missing two Aces. We are not especially big fans of the Gerber convention, the opportunities to use it seem so rare. But, perhaps this is such an opportunity. Actually, it’s the perfect opportunity, if you are prepared to chance that your side is not missing AK♥.
What are your responses to Gerber? One simple style is 4♦ for 0 (or 4), 4♥ for 1, and so on. Suppose next that North responds 4NT showing 3 Aces, pretty much assuring that 6NT is worth a shot. But why stop there? If Partner also has the K♠, then we can almost count to 13 … 5 Spades (yes, we may need to finesse the 9), a Heart, 6 top minor tricks, surely with a 13th minor suit trick available one way or the other. Gerber comes up so rarely that you may not have good agreements on the responses to the King-asking 5♣ … we’d suggest that you show a specific King (with 5NT saying “no Kings”) rather than the number of Kings.
On a theoretical note, those responses that we outlined above are generally considered to be old hat in the world of tournament bridge … if your partnership would prefer not to be considered unfashionable, you may want to try these responses to that 4♣ Gerber bid: 4♦: 1 or 4 Aces 4♥: 0 or 3 Aces (yes, 1430 responses, just for the sake of consistency) 4♠: 2 Aces and a minimum 4NT: 2 Aces and a maximum. These responses are directly analogous to Roman Key Card 1430 responses, and, as such, quite easy to remember.
16th April, 2008 Board 24 None Vul
4♣ looks like Gerber to us. What are your responses? Some players like to keep things consistent, so they agree to play “1430”, just like their Roman Key Card method. That’s fine, but what about “two without” and “two with”? You could just ignore that and use the third step to show two Aces (with no need for a 4th step). Better than that though is the following: 4♦: 1 or 4 Aces 4♥: 0 or 3 Aces 4♠: 2 Aces, minimum hand 4NT: 2 Aces, hand with extras That’s right, the responses are identical to Roman Key Card except that the trump Queen has been replaced with “extras”.
7th June, 2006 Board 31 N-S Vul
East wants to make a strong move in Hearts, but no number of Hearts is appropriate ... obviously not 2♥ ... and 3♥ is merely invitational ... and 4♥ gives up on slam. One possibility is a bid of 2♣ here, intended as New Minor Forcing. Our plan is quite crude ... establish Hearts as trumps, then check for controls ... if we are not missing 2 Aces, we'll try for slam.
But, perhaps, we might be even more direct with Plan B ... the hand is so good, we might just as well 4♣ as Gerber. There's no guarantee that the resulting slam will be cast-iron, but it will usually have a reasonable play. That's the third Gerber hand in the Wednesday Game in the last month, a most unusual occurrence as we have been known to go for years at a time without using this not-so-common convention!
© BES, Inc All Rights Reserved | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
