MickyB

I'd expect partner to rebid 2S over 1N with 6 spades, unless he was strong enough for 3S or was 6-4. By bidding 2H, I think I'm decreasing the chance of partner rebidding 2S - he will pass or raise on some hands with 2-3 hearts and 6 spades. If he was about to rebid a minor...well, never mind. I can certainly see where the 1NTers are coming from. On the 2nd, I'm worried that if I bid 2C initially, partner will think that my hearts are poor - often I would bid that way (with 6-3 or 6-4) when I wanted to hear preference before raising. Here, I couldn't care less whether partner can give preference.

AHHHHHH. I thought I was reading worst movies when I saw this :) How could you think that when noone has mentioned Wimbledon yet?

Jimmy - even not playing NMF, I'd expect that to be NF. The original sequences - are you expecting 4 hearts?

Uncontested, not playing 1D:2C as GF, what do you expect responder to have for - 1♦:2♣; 2♦:2♥? 1♦:1♠; 2♦:2♥? What bids are now forcing? Do you agree that this is referred to as "responder's reverse"? It doesn't feel like one to me (1♣:1♦; 2♣:2♥ does, bidding your 2nd suit at a higher level than your first) but I know that many consider all of these auctions to come under the same name.

2♥ on 1, in an attempt to avoid going off in 2S when 4H was making. 2C and 3H are both reasonable on 2, I prefer 3H because clubs is very unlikely to be the right strain and showing an ace-empty suit will sometimes hinder hand evaluation.

Seconded. When it was described to me as "Vampires and Werewolves, but done well" I couldn't quite believe it, but I was proved wrong :)

Yes :D

Well I'm not too likely to agree after mentioning it in my favourites. Could this be the Drury of TV shows? Think I'd just nominate a load of soaps for this. Neighbours and Coronation Street spring to mind.

Problem is, there are so many versions of Acol and interpretations of SAYC that it still isn't easy to be on the same wavelength. If you are playing with a strong partner, and like declaring 4-3 fits major fits at the 2 level then 14-16 NT, 4 card suits, 2/1 GF is a lot of fun, and probably needs less discussion than most other systems - you just need to be on the same wavelength after a 2/1. My preference is - reverses show extras picture jumps (1H:2D, 2H:4H denies a 1st/2nd round control outside of the red suits) frivolous 3NT (when a major fit is agreed, 3NT leaves room for partner to cue if he has extras, bypassing 3NT to cuebid shows interest in slam) Mixed cues If responder bids and rebids his suit, that is invitational and NF. Alternatively you can play 2/1s as 100% GF and have a single jump to the 3 level show the invitational hand.

Murph is one of the English juniors.

I was just in a chat room, and clicking on the name of a neutral (from the list on the left) didn't bring up a private chat window. Clicking on a name in the big chat window works fine, as does selecting a friend from the list. It seems others were having the same problem.

Yes.

The minor opening is much better in weak+4 than weak+5 iff you open the major from a 4432. If you open the minor then it is only slightly better than in weak+5. There are a lot of different styles - there are those who open the major, those who open the minor and rebid in NT, and those who open the minor and will bid two suits at the 1 level if they can. I don't think the last of those is common among good players.

I don't know the answer to that question, but I'm sure either way would be playable without having to guess at whether partner has 5 or 6. Either one of them took a view or it was a misunderstanding. A 2NT rebid would have shown 11-13. Btw, I don't consider their system to be Acol, as 2/1 GF is really not in keeping with the philosophy of bidding until you feel like passing! In Acol, I'd expect this sequence to not promise a 6th spade.

Indeed, but weak NT and 5 card majors works just as well (actually, slightly better) in that regard, whereas strong NT and 4 card majors is very different to any of the other three combinations.

The posts that led to this thread being started can be read here. When I said Modern Acol, I meant the treating of balanced hands as balanced - you either open or rebid in NT unless you have 4 card support for partner, so bidding 2 suits promises an unbalanced hand. Stone-age Acol used light 2/1s and a variable NT. If you open 1S on a 4=2=4=3 12 count and partner bids 2H on an 8 count, you can't afford to bid 2NT, so you need to be careful to make sure you had a rebid - any 4333 opened 1C, with two touching suits you would bid the higher then the lower, with clubs+hearts you would usually open 1C planning to rebid 1NT over 1S, with diamonds+spades you would usually open the suit below the doubleton planning on raising partner if he bid your 3 card suit. Embracing the weak NT made these issues go away. Playing weak NT and 4 card majors, I dislike opening the minor from a 4432 - not because I am sure that it is worse than opening the major, but because I am sure that it is worse than playing weak NT and 5 card majors. A slight twist on Owen's words - leaving aside preemption, the advantage of 4 card majors is knowing that when partner opens a minor, he won't have a 4 card major unless he is unbalanced. The most obvious consequence of this is that responder can happily bid his 4 card suits up the line without fear of missing a major fit. Like Frances and Jeffrey, I prefer 5 card majors, but 4 card majors with a strong NT is a perfectly viable system as it gives you the benefits of a strong NT without giving the opponents an easy ride when you have a weak balanced hand. In contrast, opening 4 card majors on a balanced 16 count tends to preempt your side more than the opponents, as the opponents are less likely to have anything on and you still have extra strength to show.

I've moved this post on 4 card majors to this new thread.

That sounds like old-fashioned Acol, and is markedly inferior to modern Acol IMO - presumably the intention is to open 1S and rebid 2H on a 4432.

Roland - Weak NT, 4 card majors and strong NT, 4 card majors are two very different systems. The former has little merit beyond simplicity, the latter certainly has its moments. Playing weak NT I'd expect 1S:2D, 3D to be 5S4D NF. I don't know whether it would be normal to rebid 2NT or 3D on a weak NT if playing 4cM, 14-16 NT - I suspect 2NT would be normal, in which case 3D would still show 5-4. Most of the strong NTers play 2/1 (almost) GF.

Ah, if Stayman is non-prom then I agree with Koen - 1N:2C, 2H:2S should be inv with 4 spades, 1N:2C, 2D:2S should be to play.

I'd expect the former to show 5S4H weak, but that's because it is dominant in the UK.

Closer and Saw are the two that spring to mind. I'm sure there are more, but I can't think at the moment - I saw the end of Hannibal for the first time yesterday, so thinking about films just makes me shudder!

Family Guy Simpsons Ally McBeal Lost Desperate Housewives The Office Little Britain (first series, it has got too vulgar lately)

It wouldn't occur to me to open anything else playing a 14-16 NT. But then I do seem to downgrade more than upgrade these days (I think I just like to be different). What did partner expect for 2NT, 17-18? It would have to be a pretty trashy 7 count before I wouldn't raise to 3NT.

In my opinion, it is good practice to open half-decent 4 card majors in 3rd+4th seat - you want to preempt, compete for the part-score and direct a lead. These hands should usually pass a 1NT or 2/1 response from partner, so if you open most 11s in 1st+2nd you probably want a 15-17 NT in 3rd+4th (so you'll have a maximum of 24 points for playing a part-score), if you pass many 11s in 1st+2nd seat you'll probably want a 14-16 NT in 3rd+4th.