Wayne_LV

A possible alternative approach is to open all balanced 15-18 hcp hands with 1C and use 1D response as waiting (similar to 2D waiting / 2C), showing any 5+ hcp hand. Then the Systems On approach after a 1NT rebid would work in its entirity. A rebid of 2C by opener would show an unblanaced hand of 12-19 with 4 or more clubs. Bidding could get a bit sticky at that point. Perhaps use of 2D opener as Mini-Roman would solve a lot of the complications of this rebid. If Mini-Roman is used, then a 2C rebid can show 5+ clubs in an unbalanced hand. Then an opening of 1D would show an unbalanced 12-19 with 5 or more diamonds. Getting to be a bit complex ..........

I agree. So far I have used the copy/paste function of the FD editor to import the bidding sequences following a strong 1NT opening as continuations after a 1NT rebid after a minor opening. I will now have to review all of the bids and "undefine" or redefine those that are illogical. Good catch.

I have been working with the FD convention card since its introduction and have found it to be an extremely useful tool for defining bids and documenting partnership agreements. I have played Weak NT (12-14) in the past playing Acol and also with modified SAYC. I found most of the advantages of the preemptive Weak NT to be negated by lost boards due to going down 2 vully, the dreaded penalty double, and by opening a minor suit with a balanced 15-17 hcp and getting passed out when all the Strong NT'ers were in 1NT while we played a weak and short minor trump suit. After a lot of reading and study I think I have found ways to make the Weak (12-14) NT opener a viable bid. 1. To combat op's double of 1NT, use Hiyashi Runout to find any 4-4 fit 2. To combat op's overcalls of 1NT, use stolen bid doubles 3. After a minor suit opening and 1 level response, 1NT rebid shows 15-17 balanced (not the 15-16 as in Acol). Systems are on and bidding proceeds as if opener had opened a strong NT. 4. After a minor suit opening and 1 level response, 2NT shows 18-19 balanced rather than the Acol 17-18. After 2NT rebid, bidding continues same as in SAYC. 5. Drop the requirements for responding to a minor opening from 6 hcp to 5 hcp, since most often partner will rebid 1NT and the bidding will not get out of hand. The only real downside to this is if partner holds a 19 pt hand in support of your major, you may land in game with only 24 pts, but that is not a show stopper. I would appreciate comments and/or suggestions on this approach. Thanks in advance, Wayne

As has already been pointed out the WJS comes up very infrequently. I do not play strong jump shifts, so the bids are available for other uses. I use those bids now for WJS with the following requirements: Jump to the 2 level = 6+ suit, 0-5 hcp Jump to 3 level = 7+ suit, 0-5 The bid accomplishes 2 things 1) It warns partner you are broke and any bid he/she makes will have to be fullfilled from his hand 2) It sometimes preempts the opponents out of a part score. It rarely stops them from bidding a game their way. If the WJS bid is passed out, it has been my experience you will usually get a very good board. This is due to the fact that most other pairs will never bid, let alone play in your long suit. If the opponents play the hand, partner can plan his defensive play knowing you probably have no defensive tricks. The downside to this is, of course, the declarer also knows you are broke and will win all finesses against your partner. In the long run, the WJS is like many other "gee whiz" bids. It comes up so seldom that it will probably affect your overall scores by less than 1% either way.

I stand corrected. Not sure where I got that notion but the dates do not coincide.

Hog, All I know about Acol is what I was taught by several players from NZ and according to them there is definitely a difference between the overcall structure of Acol and SAYC. Since there seems to be no real authority on what makes Acol Acol, I would have to say my sources are as reliable as yours. And yes, they do play a direct overcall (1s-2s) as 19+, any shape. Coincidently that is the way a direct overcall was played in Standard American before the advent of Micheal's cue bid. My posting to Simon was not designed to trigger an all out debate over the specifics of Acol vs SAYC systems -- and yes, they are systems, not attitudes. I merely was sharing my experiences with partner's from NZ who made the transistion from Acol to SAYC. Perhaps they did not play Acol as it should be played, but they all played it the same way -- the way I described it. And yes, I do think saying I do not know what I am talking about is RUDE. But not quite as rude as calling me Hyena Offal. You can surely contest that what I was taught is correct, but you sure as hell cannot deny what I say I was taught. I may not be stating the methods used by "top" Acol players but I sure know what I was taught and what I played for some period of time. Bridge systems evolve and changes in bids and attitudes confuse the most experience players and I am sure this is confusing for any player starting out in the game or attempting to change bidding systems. I cannot be sure, since Simon did not state how he played doubles and overcalls in Acol, but I suspect he may have been taught similar Acol defensive bids to those I was taught. I would appreciate any links that might explain what makes Acol Acol. I have not been able to figure it out. It is not 4 card majors -- Goren taught those in Standard American for years. It is not weak NT -- Kaplan-Sheinwold uses the 12-14 hcp range for 1NT. It is not the way 2 bids are handled since they range from 8 tricks to Benjamine 2's to weak 2's as played in SAYC. And now you tell me there is no difference in the takeout double and overcall requirements between Acol and SAYC. So just what is Acol? And please, don't tell me it is just an attitude.

Helene, I am sure you are correct. I learned Acol from a group of Kiwis I played regularly with on the MS Zone. Most of them were "Open Players" or the equivalent of A players in the ACBL, so I assumed what they taught me was standard fare for Acol. Since then I have learned there as as many variations of Acol as there are variations of Standard American. Are there any top players at the World level now that still play Acol? It is a fun system to play since there seems to be fewer "rules" than S/A and the mind seems to be freer to "think and visualize" holdings of partner and ops and less dependent on a preset bidding structure. Regardless of the system, partnership agreements seem to be the most important aspect of any system. Wayne

Hyena offal My experience with Acol has largely been playing Colonial Acol with Benji Twos's as played in New Zealand and what I stated is precisely how they play it. Offensive bidding consists of 4 card major openings (all 1 of suit openings bids show 4+ cards in the suit), Weak NT (12-14), Weak 2 bids in majors, strong 2c and stronger 2d. I have played both Acol and SAYC with the same partner on many occasions in the past, but we have recently played SAYC exclusively. We simply do not get as good results with Acol as with SAYC. I think the texture first general approach of SAYC vs the points first approach of Acol is partly the reason. Further I think the weak NT is good only vs weak opponents. Good ops will rarely let your preemptive 1NT get in their way and if you get to play 1NT vulnerable and go down 2 tricks you will have lost a lot of IMP's. Acol was developed in London many years ago with the main purpose of combating the Italian Blue Club System that dominated the bridge world for a time. I think, due to the design of the Acol system, it is probably more effective vs a strong club system than it is vs SAYC or 2/1. Acol thrives on the cheap overalls afforded by a strong 1 club opener. Those cheap overcalls are not as plentiful when playing against a Standard American based system. Further, to be successful with Acol, both partners must play the hand extremely well since you often find yourself in game with 12 opposite 12. The above has been my experiences with Acol. I am sure others have very different experiences. Wayne

Simon, Defensive bidding in Acol differs markedly from that of SAYC. Playing Acol you generally double with any opening hand regardless of shape and all overcalls are generally less that opening hands. A direct cue bid in Acol usually shows 19+ hcp, any shape. Playing SAYC, a double of ops opening bid is for takeout and promises at least 3 card support in the unbid suits. An overcall can be as light as 8 hcp at the one level to up to 16 hcp. Stronger hands (17+) are usually shown by first doubling and then bidding a new suit or raising partners takeout. Balanced 15-18 hcp hands with stops in ops suit are shown with a 1NT overcall. Some opening hands, especialy if you hold 5 cards in the ops bid suit, cannot be bid on the first round and must be passed. This calls for a technique known as Balance Bidding in the passout seat. Your partner will have to double or overcall sometimes with lighter than normal vaues to "protect" your passed hand. To summarize, you can bid more hands if you employ the 2 suit showing bids (Michael's Cue Bid and Unusual NT) and if you master the techniques of balance bidding. Good luck on your transistion from Acol to SAYC Wayne