Weired conventions in Lancaster

[helene_t]

Most people up here play

 

1NT-(pass)-2♠*

~11 points, no 4-card major

 

1NT-(pass)-2NT*

weak t/o in either minor

 

1NT-(x)-(xx through 2♥)*

transfer

 

1NT-(x)-pass-(pass)

xx-(pass)-2♦*

♦+♥

 

Is this common everywhere in England or is it a local thing?

[slothy]

LOL

 

welcome to the UK - the land of usless conventions - Helen :(

[paulg]

The specifics are local, but you'll find something similar in many UK clubs.

 

The first problem for most Acol 12-14 NT pairs is that everyone was told that transfers over notrump was a good idea, but there was never any consensus about the 2♠ response. In my experience 4-way transfers are a fairly new phenomenon and most club players do not use them, so the 2♠ gets used for various poorly thought out ideas.

 

At least the Lancastrians are using 2NT for something else. Around here, using 2♠ to show a balanced 11 count is combined with still having 2NT as a balanced invitation -- go figure!

 

And wriggles after 1NT vary enormously, although why you'd play transfers is beyond me.

 

Paul

[MickyB]

Yup, 2♠ as 11 points, 2NT as 12 points is disturbingly common. I've even seen people use this over their (15-17) 1NT overcall, presumably leaving 3NT as either 9-10 or 13+ :(

[Walddk]

Yup, 2♠ as 11 points, 2NT as 12 points is disturbingly common. I've even seen people use this over their (15-17) 1NT overcall, presumably leaving 3NT as either 9-10 or 13+ :(

Hilarious :) No wonder England never win anything significant.

 

Roland

[paulg]

The generic UK problem is the lack of any standard methods. As others have often written, Acol is more a philosophy than a bidding system.

 

I have always been impressed by the Partnership Desks at the NABCs I have attended. The ability of the American players to sit down and play with almost anyone with practically no discussion is impressive. You see the same on-line where people can play SAYC or a fairly simple 5-card majors/strong NT with little conversation.

 

The standard of most clubs in the UK is mediocre. 'Standard English' is only known by new players fresh from their evening classes, the rest muddle through with their local understanding of what Acol means. But they enjoy the evening's bridge.

 

The same is largely true at county level. Most pairs are there for a Sunday afternoon's entertainment and could not tell you whether 1♦-1♥-1NT denies 4 spades or not.

 

Serious system discussion only really happens with pairs playing at the national events.

 

In my opinion England do not win anything because their top players do not get sufficient exposure to high-level bridge. Scotland does not win anything for the same reason, but also because we do not have enough good players and the best ones play for England (and USA1).

 

Paul

[helene_t]

I have always been impressed by the Partnership Desks at the NABCs I have attended. The ability of the American players to sit down and play with almost anyone with practically no discussion is impressive.

Well until now I have played Acol with some 7 different p's IRL and similar number online, and they all seem to bid, lead and signal almost the same. This is contrary to the Netherlands where there are different leads, carding, 5cM vs 4cM, system on or off in competition, strong or weak jump shifts, weak or intermediate jump overcalls, forcing or negative freebids etc.

 

But I wonder if the prevalence of weak NT and 4cM prevents English players from absorbing modern bidding theory from France, North America, Italy and the Netherlands.

[whereagles]

Yup, 2♠ as 11 points, 2NT as 12 points is disturbingly common.

huh... wonder what they'd think of me... with 8 I either pass or bid 3NT. I don't make invites.. lol.

[david_c]

And wriggles after 1NT vary enormously, although why you'd play transfers is beyond me.

It's because they want to make the strong hand declarer. Misguided, perhaps, but I'm sure that's the reason they play it.

 

1NT-(pass)-2♠*

~11 points, no 4-card major

 

1NT-(pass)-2NT*

weak t/o in either minor

Yeah, I was playing this last night. The thing is, very few club players have really thought about what to bid on strong hands with a minor (where minor-suit transfers might be helpful), and they feel they would be lost without a bid showing a balanced invite. So it's very common to play either this method or the same thing with 2♠ and 2NT switched.

[P_Marlowe]

Most people up here play

 

1NT-(pass)-2♠*

~11 points, no 4-card major

 

1NT-(pass)-2NT*

weak t/o in either minor

 

<snip>

Playing 2S as some kind of Min-Max ask,

with a possible sign of in a minor on the 3

level, may not be perfect, but is certainly

not terrible as well.

 

The same holds true for playing 2NT as eiter

weak or strong with both minors.

 

At least I play this in my regular partnership.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[david_c]

But I wonder if the prevalence of weak NT and 4cM prevents English players from absorbing modern bidding theory from France, North America, Italy and the Netherlands.

Depends what you mean by modern bidding theory. If you mean things like 2/1 (which is indeed incompatible with Acol) and (T-)Walsh over 1♣, then yes you can forget it. Modern bidding theory in Acol-land is maybe

 

- Weak jump overcalls.

- Most doubles for take-out.

- Competitive / pre-emptive raises in competition, with a cue-bid showing a better hand.

- Splinters.

 

All these things have become noticeably more popular since I started playing about ten years ago. The more old-fashioned club players still cannot be assumed to play these things.

[paulg]

I have always been impressed by the Partnership Desks at the NABCs I have attended. The ability of the American players to sit down and play with almost anyone with practically no discussion is impressive.

Well until now I have played Acol with some 7 different p's IRL and similar number online, and they all seem to bid, lead and signal almost the same. This is contrary to the Netherlands where there are different leads, carding, 5cM vs 4cM, system on or off in competition, strong or weak jump shifts, weak or intermediate jump overcalls, forcing or negative freebids etc.

 

But I wonder if the prevalence of weak NT and 4cM prevents English players from absorbing modern bidding theory from France, North America, Italy and the Netherlands.

I think it is lack of interest and lack of access to modern theory, unless it is written up in English Bridge, Bridge Magazine or played by one of the better pairs in the club.

 

A couple more weeks in Lancashire and you'll find that they probably don't absorb modern theory from Yorkshire, let alone France :)

 

Contrary to all my arguments is the speed at which the multi-2♦ swept the country. Although I think its use is declining in the tournament game, it is still in vogue at many clubs.

 

p

[helene_t]

Contrary to all my arguments is the speed at which the multi-2♦ swept the country. Although I think its use is declining in the tournament game, it is still in vogue at many clubs.

Sounds familiar, but I haven't encountered multi very often here. There was one pair in Lake District who played it and a couple of pairs in Coventry, no-one in Lancaster so far. Those BBO partners who try to convince me to play multi are usually Polish, occasionally Bulgarian, Romanian or Turkish, but never English.

[hrothgar]

Contrary to all my arguments is the speed at which the multi-2♦ swept the country. Although I think its use is declining in the tournament game, it is still in vogue at many clubs.

 

p

What do people play in tournaments?

[helene_t]

wonder what they'd think of me...

You won't be able to tell. The English are very polite :)

[paulg]

Contrary to all my arguments is the speed at which the multi-2♦ swept the country. Although I think its use is declining in the tournament game, it is still in vogue at many clubs.

 

p

What do people play in tournaments?

There are still a fair number of multi 2♦ users, although some of these use it with a weak 2♥ as the only weak option.

 

Benjy Acol is popular, where 2♦ is any game forcing hand or balanced 23+. Reverse Benj adherents use 2♦ to show eight playing tricks in any suit.

 

There are an increasing number of weak 2♦ openers, plus a handful of Ekren and Precision 2♦ users.

 

My impression, although there are plenty who play more tournaments than me, is that the increase in "three weak 2s" is similar to the level of decline of the multi.

[Wackojack]

At my club in Surrey, about 80% play 12-14 Benji and also 1NT-2S range enquiry and 1NT-2NT minor take-out. Wriggles after 1NT is doubled vary; mainly exit transfers or Helmek (sorry if spelt incorrectly) Significantly most of the better players play this and some weaker players experiment. At club level the deciding factor on who does well is: 1 defence 2. Declarer play. 3. Bidding judgement The bidding system does not come into it. One of the clubs leading players plays EHAA in major tournaments and has a few converts at the club. I am not one of them. Another member international with many Gold cup wins, plays Benji at the club but when I see him on vugraph he plays something different with a number of gadgets.

 

btw I think many of the American conventions are weird

[slothy]

wonder what they'd think of me...

You won't be able to tell. The English are very polite :)

Lancaster, yet again, must be a small enclave of misfits extremely unlike rest of population i have played bridge with / against

 

Geezuz

[sheepman]

My local club in yorkshire has periods where everyone plays the same (awful) defence to NT openings, the current favourite is pin point astro.

[han]

wonder what they'd think of me...

You won't be able to tell. The English are very polite :P

Lancaster, yet again, must be a small enclave of misfits extremely unlike rest of population i have played bridge with / against

 

Geezuz

Hilarious exchange.

[slothy]

wonder what they'd think of me...

You won't be able to tell. The English are very polite :)

Lancaster, yet again, must be a small enclave of misfits extremely unlike rest of population i have played bridge with / against

 

Geezuz

Hilarious exchange.

Of course Hans, my behaviour at the table is impeccable.

 

[it is my behaviour off it that has elicited a court injunction, a restraining order and the odd foray of shadow-boxing]

[blackshoe]

huh... wonder what they'd think of me...

For some reason, this made me think of Jack Nicholson's line (as The Joker) in "Batman": "Wait'll they get a load of me." :)

[helene_t]

btw I think many of the American conventions are weird

At least nobody plays Capp here, they are weired but not that weired.

[foo]

The specifics are local, but you'll find something similar in many UK clubs.

 

The first problem for most Acol 12-14 NT pairs is that everyone was told that transfers over notrump was a good idea, but there was never any consensus about the 2♠ response. In my experience 4-way transfers are a fairly new phenomenon and most club players do not use them, so the 2♠ gets used for various poorly thought out ideas.

 

At least the Lancastrians are using 2NT for something else. Around here, using 2♠ to show a balanced 11 count is combined with still having 2NT as a balanced invitation -- go figure!

 

And wriggles after 1NT vary enormously, although why you'd play transfers is beyond me.

 

Paul

Over 1N= 12-14, there actually is a fairly strong majority belief that transfers are nowhere near as useful as they are opposite a strong 1N opening.

 

The only time they have greater utility than say, Double Barrelled (AKA "Two Way") Stayman, is when 1N= 12-14 is opened in 3rd or 4th.

 

As for uses for the 2N response to 1N, Grant Baze, Mike Lawrence, Bob Hamman, and a few others of that caliber have all said that the natural invitation, while rare, is useful and better than playing a structure where responder is using Stayman on all invites. Giving information away for free about the closed hand can't be good. Especially when Responder doesn't care as much about the information as the defense (eg- when Responder does not have a 4cM but must use Stayman to Invite).

[Wackojack]

Lets go back to compare the degree of weirdness between what I will call now the 1NT- 2♠ and 1NT-2NT "Lancaster" method and the common North American "4 suit transfer" method.

 

The Lancaster 2♠ is a nice clear invite either to game or slam. Indeed this method will find the elusive 4-4 or 5-4 minor slam.

 

Using 4 suit tranfers a balanced invite has to go through "non primissory" Stayman. This is really weird. You ask for a 4 card major when you don't have one yourself. Then you have to tie yourself in knots to show that you really do have a 4 card major when partner announces he has the other. Also when you do hold a strong minor suit hand I read that the intermediate bid rebid i.e 2NT after 2♠, and 3♣ after 2NT, could have different meanings according to agreement. I wonder at club level, how many players have an agreement on what this bid means. Perhaps someone could enlighten me on what is normal.

 

Compare with the Lancaster method 1NT-2♠ commands 3♣. If responder bids anything except pass or 3♦ it is clear that this is a forward going move.

 

So in terms of weirdness 4 suit transfers win easily. I spite of that btw I prefer the 4 suit transfer method, but only if we can get clear prior agreements on the whole 1NT bidding structure.

 

Much the same could be said about many other conventions that mostly seem to originate from the other side of the pond. Yes, many, but my guess is that not all, improve bidding efficacy. (I wont mention the taboo F or G words) Without clear agreements on the options and variations that go with many of these conventions, knowledge of when appropriate to use, and without thought on the coherence of the mix, the simple approach is less accident prone and of course less weird.