profhsg

Quick question on stratification in ACBL World games. Is the stratification by ACBL points or by BBO points? Thanks in advance.

I didn't intend to get a debate going on whether 1♥, 2♦, 3♣ is a reverse by the 3♣ bidder. But as long as it has gotten started here's my 2 cents worth. I first learned bridge back in the 1970's. The first bridge book I read was Edgar Kaplan's Winning Contract Bridge Complete. Kaplan wrote that any rebid by opener which forces the responder to bid at the three level if they prefer opener's first suit is a reverse. Kaplan stated that the reason for this was not that some conclave of bridge "graybeards" mandated this, but because it drove the auction to the three level and should thus show extra values. Now bridge bidding has come quite a long way in the half century plus since Kaplan wrote that. Nonetheless, that has, for better or worse, remained my framework for what a reverse is.

Using a 2/1 GF system, what does a reverse by the opener after a 2/1 GF bid mean? E.g. 1H, 2D, 2S, or 1S, 2H, 3C. After consulting different volumes on 2/1 GF systems I seem to have found three very different approaches: (a) the reverse shows no extra values, (b) the reverse shows extra values as in a non 2/1 GF system, or © the reverse shows no extra values at the two level, but does show extra values if made at the three level. Which do you use/prefer and why? Thanks in advance.

Playing 5 card majors and 2/1 GF you have the following auction: Opener Responder 1 minor 1 major 2 of Responder's major 2NT Responder's 2NT rebid asking the nature of opener's raise. Step responses, 3♣ 3 card raise min. opening, 3♦ 4 card raise sound opening, etc. Around my club the 2NT rebid is given the name of a local player who uses it. A Google search revealed that the name used at our club doesn't extend much beyond the four walls of our club. Does anyone know what this convention is called? I realize that given the global extent of this board's users I'm likely to get a variety of answers. That's perfectly OK with me. Thanks in advance.

Playing five card majors a 2/1 game forcing and a 1NT forcing system. You hold a minimum opening hand 11-15 HCP with 4♠-5♥ and 2-2 in the minor suits. E.g., K J x x ♠, A 10 x x x ♥, A x ♦, x x ♣. You open the bidding with 1♥. LHO passes and partner bids 1NT forcing. RHO passes. What's your rebid? A 2♠ rebid is totally out of the question since you have nowhere near the values for a reverse. That leaves a bid in one of your two card minors or a rebid of your somewhat dodgy five card heart as your only choices. The few sources I've found discussing the hand seem to opt for the former. Somehow I feel uncomfortable doing that. [bTW under U.S. ACBL rules does that mean you must alert opponents that a minor suit rebid after a 1♥ opening and a 1NT forcing response may be made on as few as 2 cards in the suit?] Is there anything to be said for rebidding the hearts as the lesser of two lies? Thanks PS I'm new to these forums so if there's a better section in which to post this, please let me know.

I've always liked the Acol variant of having a variable 1NT opening of 12-14 not vulnerable and 15-17 vulnerable. Could such an approach be incorporated into a five card major 2 over 1 game forcing system? Advantages, disadvantages, thoughts? Thanks in advance.

I'm probably missing an obvious answer, but I'll ask. On individual ACBL individual tournaments, non-robotic, if you've posted a convention card, whose card is in use when you get paired with another player? Thanks in advance.

When negative doubles were first put into use around 1957 many players set an upper limit on them of an opening hand. If the responder had an opening hand or better, they were to cue bid the overcaller's suit (which said nothing about controls in that suit). The approach seems to have fallen into total disuse. Yet, it still seems like it has a lot of merit in it. Pros? Cons? Thoughts?