Hearts, Spades or No Trumps?

[GriffenMac]

This is hand from a recent club night. You are playing ACOL (4 card majors and non game forcing 2/1) with a pick up partner. Partner opens 1♠ and you hold:

 

[hv=d=n&v=e&s=sj95hqjt876dkjc73]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

What is your bid?

[P_Marlowe]

1NT, the system bid.

The crucial part is missing: weak or strong NT?

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[GriffenMac]

The crucial part is missing: weak or strong NT?

Weak no trump (12-14)

[jdonn]

2♠. If 1NT was forcing I would do that and try to play in hearts, but that is not an option any more since we may end up playing 1NT with two big major suit fits. Since I'm clearly not good enough for 2♥ what else is there?

[P_Marlowe]

The crucial part is missing: weak or strong NT?

Weak no trump (12-14)

This makes 2S more attractive, but

I seldom raise on 3 cards.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[whereagles]

If pard is a fine player, 2♠.

 

If not, I'll hog the hand with 1NT + 2♥ ;)

[EricK]

Playing traditional Acol (where 2/1 can be much lighter than most modern systems) this is a minimum 2♥ bid.

 

That style is quite rare nowadays though, so I don't know if your pick-up partner would be playing it. If partner opens all 12-14 balanced hands with 1NT then there is a good chance that 2♥ might actually lead to a playable contract even if partner expects a stronger hand. Note that you have a guaranteed 8+ fit in one of the majors (assuming partner doesn't open 4-1-4-4 hands with 1♠)

[Guest Jlall]

I'd go 1N.

[awm]

I suspect that 2♥ is the right acol bid, even though the call tends to offend those of us (including myself) who are accustomed to methods with more sound 2/1 bids.

 

Last I checked, 1♠-2♥-2♠ was NF in acol. And this is what I expect partner to bid with hands including five spades, less than three hearts, and less than strong NT values. Since 2♠ is frequently the right contract opposite such a hand, we reach the best spot. If partner raises hearts we are also in good shape (double fit should make game a reasonable gamble opposite most partner hands, especially if 12-14 point 5332 types often open 1nt). If partner makes a high reverse we're guaranteed a spade fit and approximately game values, and if partner rebids 2nt (strong notrump opening) then I'll punt 4♥.

 

On the other hand, 1♠-2♠ should be passable with 15-16 balanced, in which case we could easily miss a game and play in the wrong major suit to boot.

[Ant590]

I'm presuming you bid 1NT and got told off for not bidding 2♥? :)

 

I am also presuming that you were top half and us lower 2nd ?

[the hog]

"If not, I'll hog the hand with 1NT + 2♥ "

I am insulted Whereagles!

 

Seriously, I would bid 2S on this. The choices realistically are between 1NT and 2S; for the reasons proferred by Josh I would find the 2S bid. 30 years ago this would of course have been a 2H bid. Nowadays I do not know anyone who plays the very light 2/1 responses. Virtually all tournament Acol players I have encountered play a 2/1 as forcing to 2NT.

[MickyB]

A lot of this comes down to where you want to be playing opposite 15-16 balanced - this hand will (should) pass a 1NT/2♠ response. Move the ♦KJ to spades and it would be a clearcut 2♥ bid, as it is I'm bidding 2♠, or 1NT if I think I should be declaring.

 

I vaguely remember Ron+I having this discussion before, but I still think weak NT/4 card majors/2-over-1s forcing to 2NT is an unplayable combination...you need to 2/1 to get to game opposite 15-16 bal, but you don't want to be any higher than 2 of pard's suit opposite a load of minimum unbal hands.

[Lanor Fow]

Don't worry Ant it was in the indy on thurs (i know because the shouts from opps came across the room, aparantly there was a 9 card and an 8 card major fit both missed to get a top in no trumps.

[whereagles]

"If not, I'll hog the hand with 1NT + 2♥ "

I am insulted Whereagles!

huh..? change your alias :P

[skjaeran]

I'll suppose this is old style Acol. :) (I must admit I've never played that, and never will.)

 

In that style this is a "clear" 2♥ bid. If partner is minimum without a ♥ fit, he'll rebid 2♠, and I'll pass.

[MickyB]

I'll suppose this is old style Acol. :P (I must admit I've never played that, and never will.)

 

In that style this is a "clear" 2♥ bid. If partner is minimum without a ♥ fit, he'll rebid 2♠, and I'll pass.

In old-style Acol, 1♠:2♥, 2NT (15-16 bal) would be NF. This is modern Acol, where that sequence is GF :)

[badderzboy]

I would bid 2♥s without a second thought and I guess I play modern Acol as I've played less than 5 years so...

 

I degrade the 10pt requirement for the 2/1 with a long suit so here 8pts and a 6 card suit suffice especially when ptr knows I must have 5.

 

as 1♠ can be a 4 card suit if 4333 and assuming partner bids 4 card suits up the line ... I don't bid 2♠s without a singleton.

 

As MickyB says 2NT is G/F after a 2/1 these days.

 

And I have a safe pass over 2♠ and a simple 3♥s over 2NT.

 

What can go wrong :)...

 

Steve

[han]

OK, I admit, I do find 2H offensive and Acol was what I learned first.

[EricK]

OK, I admit, I do find 2H offensive and Acol was what I learned first.

Why exactly?

 

Aren't "Colours first" and "Shape before points" both cornerstones of modern bidding theory?

 

In many ways, Acol was way ahead of its time. Especially in regards to its 4-handed rather than 2-handed approach to bidding.

[neilkaz]

My understanding of older ACOL is that the bid here is 2♥, but I'd defer to ACOL experts, which I am not.

 

.. neilkaz ..

[han]

OK, I admit, I do find 2H offensive and Acol was what I learned first.

Why exactly?

Because my dad taught me to play bridge and he only knew Acol.

[EricK]

OK, I admit, I do find 2H offensive and Acol was what I learned first.

Why exactly?

Because my dad taught me to play bridge and he only knew Acol.

My question was targeted at the first half of your statement, not the last!

[han]

Sigh, I was afraid of that. My cheap joke won't do it then.

 

I think it is not a good idea to bid 2H on such a large range of hands. 1S is already bid on a huge variety of hands. If 2H is also bid on so many hands then it becomes too hard to figure out what the best spot is. And you have already taken up so much bidding space. Most of the hands you will be bidding 1S-2H on are your hands: hands where you may have a game or slam. These are the hands with which you often want to have a careful constructive auction.

 

It is true that this style may serve you well on some hands (when you blast into game and the opponents have less information, or when you quickly find a fit and the opponents never find theirs), but on even more hands you don't have enough space to figure out what the right level or even the best strain is.

 

On a less serious note: you say that Acol was far ahead of its time and that may be true but others call this the old-fashioned style and there likely is a reason why this style went out of fashion. :)

[helene_t]

OK, I admit, I do find 2H offensive and Acol was what I learned first.

With all respect, Han, I think Biedermeijer ("Dutch Acol"), rather than Acol, was your first bidding system.

 

In Biedermeijer, a 1NT opening is 15-17 so a 2/1 must be strong enough to let partner play 2NT if he has 12 points. In (English) Acol, this hand is close to 2♥ and in some older styles it would be strong enough.

[Guest Jlall]

Aren't "Colours first" and "Shape before points" both cornerstones of modern bidding theory?

no.