Tramticket

In Benji it is usual for 2D to be a relay over the 2C opening, but 2H is a negative over a 2D opening. But it is better to understand the rationale, because then you will make thoughtful bids rather than robotic bids. The reason for the 2D relay is to give space for opener to show a possible strong hand with hearts without having to go to the three-level. But on this particular hand it is perfectly reasonable to bid a 2H positive response, because partner will be delighted if they actually hold hearts! The thinking response on this hand is 2H.

There are various possibilities. In one partnership we show where our values lie. In another we simply start cue bidding up the line (Italian style).

The way to think about the Gambling 3NT convention is that you are making a 4C or 4D pre-empt. But, since you have a running suit, you prefer not to by-pass 3NT in case partner has stops in the other suits. You expect partner to correct to 4m most of the time, which is fine because that was always the value bid on the hand. I agree that it is rare that you will open 3NT and even rarer that partner will leave you to play in 3NT. But we have skipped three full rounds of bidding so I don't want the bid to be high frequency and do want the bid to be very specific.

We have the following agreements: a. If the player on lead has bid a suit, double = lead your suit. b. If the doubler has bid a suit, double = lead my suit. c. If both have bid a suit, double = lead your suit. d. If neither defender has bid, double = lead dummy’s first suit. e. If no suit has been bid naturally, double = lead a spade.

This one is just bizarre. This is the strongest argument in favour of passing.

C3

3D opening, even if you did have a weak 2D available.

Thanks Mike, very informative. If you change the hand to 4-1-4-4 (♠AKJ2 ♥2 ♦AJ97 ♣AK84), would your auction have the same start?

Standard Acol uses 1NT-3H and 1NT-3S as natural and slam invitational - if playing these methods, you certainly don't need Texas as well. If I have agreed other three-level methods then two-up transfers (South African Texas) is a reasonable option. Meanwhile, after a weak NT, you are often playing in game with 13 opposite 13 or similar. With the points evenly divided, it can be helpful to choose which hand you want to make declarer. [hv=pc=n&e=sk8hkjt632dk94cq2&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1np4hppp]133|200[/hv] [hv=pc=n&e=sa2hak6432d52cjt9&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1np2dp2hp4hppp]133|200[/hv]

Stayman is largely unchanged. But you should include weak hands in your Stayman: 4441 - bid Stayman and pass any response from partner. (54)22 - bid Stayman, then bid the five-card major if partner responds 2♦. Jacoby transfers should be standard, whatever NT you are playing. Texas transfers aren't particularly needed - it can be useful to play 1NT-4♥ and 1NT-4♠ as natural and right-side the contract depending on tenace holdings etc. There are various possible uses for 1NT-2♠ - including four-suit transfers; range-asking; weak take-out to a minor; etc. Three-level responses - whatever you currently play probably works for a weak NT.

4♣ would be better than this for us as well. But I am the partner who is short in clubs and I want to stretch to get into the bidding and it does give us the best chance of finding the best strain.

Who are you playing against? Some club players will happily open 2♥, vulnerable with this in third seat: [hv=pc=n&w=st93hq87543dq9cj5]133|100[/hv] If you play a lot with these opponents, your best strategy is to pass and wait for partner to reopen with a double!

2♣

Very few will have the agreement that 2♣ might be a weak hand that wants to force to game. I would argue that if that really is the agreement then it would be sufficiently unusual that an explanation should make reference to that fact that the bid is forcing to game, but is not necessarily strong. I don't think that the EBU's Blue Book has everything right, but I think that 2.B.4 is useful in defining forcing:

Some move on from Acol. But, Acol can be a pretty sophisticated system if played properly and there is no reason why players need treat Acol as a stepping stone.

There are swings and roundabouts. Playing a weak no trump is less of a risk at pairs, because if you get doubled and go for a number it is just one board rather than a huge IMP swing against you. But this doesn't happen often and more importantly, opening a weak no trump can be a very profitable source of part-score gains when the opponents can't compete with their balanced hands. On the other hand, you sometimes find yourself playing in 1NT rather than an eight-card fit in a major, which the strong no trumpers have found. I think that modern 2-over-1 systems are well equipped at game bidding because they have established a forcing auction earlier on, but less well-equipped in part-score auctions. To be honest, it is more important to play a system that you know and thoroughly understand. I have played Acol for nearly 40 years and I am happy to continue doing so.

This is the key. - You are a club short of a 3NT opening. - But partner won't expect a running suit for a 3C opening. - The hand is close to a 1C opening, but a little light. - There is no rule against passing.

East is likely to hold clubs. A spade looks normal.

Acol is not a single unified system and arguably, never has been. When you agree to play Acol you also need to discuss your approach with exactly two four-card suits. The choice has many downstream ramifications and I think that this is a fundamental upfront discussion. In old Acol, the approach was to open one four-card suit, then bid the second. The idea was to prepare your rebid and with the black suits the opening would be 1♣ with a plan to rebid 1♠ over a red-suit response. Sorry I disagree with Cyberyeti on this. In the modern world, a hand with two four-card suits is considered balanced. The plan with two four-card suits is to open 1NT if within range, or open a suit and rebid no trumps. Bidding two suits would show an unbalanced hand and promises five cards in the first-bid suit. The choices with a major and a minor are: Open the major: With two bids we show our main features - the major and the balanced shape. Bidding the major is mildly pre-emptive and will often force the opponents to compete at the two level or remain silent. On the other hand, we lose some bidding space and often have to respond 1NT, which is an awkward response in Acol and can wrong-side no trump contracts. We might also lose the club suit as pointed out by Mike. Open the minor: This preserves bidding space and allows partner to respond naturally at the one level. On the other hand, if partner doesn't respond in our major, we don't show it until the third round of bidding, if at all. We will not open the major suit very often, so why not go all of the way and play five-card majors? Choose the opening, based on other factors in the hand. This is superficially attractive, but can create uncertainty later in the auction as Nige1 seems to have found. Personally I agree with Nige1's new approach: - ♥s before ♠s. - Majors before minors. - ♣s before ♦s .

I am not a fan of Support Doubles in a Weak NT context. There is one hand which is difficult to handle in this auction, When playing a Weak No Trump - a balanced hand in the strong no trump range, that was planning to rebid no trumps but doesn't have a stopper. For me this is the best use of the double This hand looks like at least 15+ to me and I would double.

This would be my plan. I guess that I have to double now and lead a trump.

Winnie will be missed. I have had some interesting encounters over the years. My condolences to her family and friends.

It is closer, but I would still double with this second holding.

I agree

This is an interesting sequence in Acol. A 2NT rebid would usually show a strong NT hand (15+) and would be forcing to game because the two-level response shows 10+. However things are interesting if the interference forces responder to bid at the two level in a higher ranking suit. Some players would still rebid 2NT with 15+, which means that they would need to rebid 3H with a semi-balanced minimum and a four-card club suit as the second suit. I prefer that 2NT shows this minimum and 3NT shows 15+. But this does make it difficult to check for an eight-card major fit after the 3NT rebid. Definitely a discussion to have with your partner. With this agreement that you need to bid 3NT with a balanced 15+, I think that 3C is best.