Why the preponderance of strong 2s in acol?

[el mister]

Playing in the acol room, it seems that the vast majority play strong 2s, often across the board, ♣♦♥♠. I find this a little exasperating, where p uses 2♠ to show strength rather than weakness, but that could be down to me just not understanding it. Can someone fill me in on what is the thinking behind this style? I've also seen this as SOP with the old timers at the club.

 

To have no weak pre-emptive bid available, just so you can show a strong hand on the opening bid, doesn't strike me as an equitable trade-off. I mean, there's usually going to be plenty more opportunities to bid your hand. How often does a hand get passed out after a 1M opener for example?

[helene_t]

The strong two's are useful with:

- a GF two-suiter which you don't want to open 2♣ because of the risk of preemption

- a hand too strong for a 1x opening followed by 3x but too weak for forcing to game. Those hands otherwise make som fake jump shift on a 3-card.

 

That said, I agree that strong twos are somewhat old-fashioned. Maybe more popular among Acol players than among players of other systems, because many of those British players who adopt weak twos also adopt a different bidding system.

 

However, at my local club as well as tournaments I have played in here in England, most play Acol with weak twos.

[Finch]

Most modern Acol players don't generally play Acol Twos any more (with some honourable exceptions, and also quite often with the exception that they play them in 4th suit as e.g. I do in one partnership) for exactly the reasons you give.

 

However, they are not without merit. There are two main advantages to playing them

 

1. It takes the strain off the 1-level openers. If you have a single-suited hand that wants to force to game once partner has shown enough for a response, you have to invent a rebid - that may mean a 'fake' reverse or jump shift into a non-existent suit, or it may mean a 3NT rebid on an unsuitable hand. If you cannot have that hand type, you don't need to invent suits and partner can always raise with confidence. (Remember that historically in Acol even auctions such as 1H - 2C - 3H were non-forcing.)

 

The modern style of Acol 2 plays step 1 as a negative, so you can use the auction e.g. 2D (Acol) - 2H (negative) - 2NT to show a strong hand with a long minor: cheaper and more descriptive than the 'standard' options which are either opening 2NT or opening 1D and rebidding 3NT.

 

Modern US style seems (at least in some cases) to cater for these hands by opening 2C and playing that 2C - 2D - 2M is either non-forcing, or the auction can be dropped in 3M. That's a different solution, but indicates that this is a real problem. Playing Acol Twos a 2C opening is strictly game forcing (except that 2C - 2D - 2NT can be passed).

 

2. It's useful to have a forcing opening with a two-suiter where you might miss game if partner passes you out at the 1-level, which is not game forcing. You can play 2H - 2S (negative) - 3C as non-forcing, showing a strong hand with hearts and clubs. In addition, it can be handy to open a game forcing two-suiter with an Acol two as you have a much better chance of getting both suits bid if the opponents are going to pre-empt at all, or of telling partner you have a lot of playing strength without vast numbers of high cards.

 

NB: I am referring to 2D/2H/2S openings to show a "hand of power and quality" with 8+ playing tricks, but usually not strong enough to open with a game forcing 2C (All Acol players who use Acol Twos use 2C to show a game force or 23+ balanced). They can also be used on some specific game forcing hands, primarily two-suiters.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

Lots of peoble, who play strongs 2, will play multi 2D as well,

i.e. they will have a way to open with a weak, if playing Acol,

some weak twos will be opened at the 1 level.

 

Playing strong 2s means, does not mean that you open only

strong hands suitable for an Amercian standard 2C bid, you

would also open 5-5 hands with 4 loosers and say 15HCP

with a strong 2 bid.

This will increase the frequence, and you may even be able

to preempt them out of a game.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[NickRW]

Playing in the acol room, it seems that the vast majority play strong 2s, often across the board, ♣♦♥♠. I find this a little exasperating,...<snip>

Well, (right or wrong) strong twos is the basic Acol standard, so, if you agree "Acol", then you have to separately agree some weak two options if you want to play them.

 

A lot of Acol players know "Benji". 2C = an Acol two, 2D = most everyone else's idea of 2C, 2H/2S = weak, 2N = bal, strong. Also reverse Benji where 2C and 2D are reversed is liked by some - though I don't think it makes a whole heap of difference. This is quite a reasonable compromise that keeps the Acol twos out of the 1 openers and still gives you 2 of the 3 weak bids that many others have. It is worth asking if a pick up Acol partner knows Benji if you really like your weak twos.

 

There are heaps and heaps of other possible solutions as to how to get weak twos of some sort into Acol - but none of them terribly standard - it needs discussion time you often won't get online.

 

Nick

[the hog]

Acol 2 bids have a lot going for them. Why do you find this exasperating. As Frances said, they relieve the pressure on your 1 level openings. Couple them with a 2D multi and you have lost nothing as you still have your weak 2 bids available. You also gain additional meanings in sequences like

1H 1S

3H

This could now show the dreaded BW hand of death, for example.

 

Having said this, I prefer my 2M openings to show weak 2 suited hands.

[Guest Jlall]

You also gain additional meanings in sequences like

1H 1S

3H

Umm, no. This auction does not usually show the equivalent of a strong 2 bid lol.

[the hog]

You also gain additional meanings in sequences like

1H 1S

3H

Umm, no. This auction does not usually show the equivalent of a strong 2 bid lol.

In Acol, if you are not playing an 8 playing trick 2 opening bid, you have to lump these into this rebid. lolem

[el mister]

THanks all - v helpful. I think I'll just put Benji Acol in my profile to save on future hassle.

 

If you play Acol with a multi 2D, is this how the opening goes at the 2 level:

 

2♣: v strong, 23+ hcp

2♦: Weak 2 in ♥ or♠ or 4.4.4.1 strong

2♥: Strong Acol 2, hand of power and quality

2♠: Strong Acol 2 etc

 

Is this treatment common?

[P_Marlowe]

THanks all - v helpful. I think I'll just put Benji Acol in my profile to save on future hassle.

 

If you play Acol with a multi 2D, is this how the opening goes at the 2 level:

 

2♣: v strong, 23+ hcp

2♦: Weak 2 in ♥ or♠ or 4.4.4.1 strong

2♥: Strong Acol 2, hand of power and quality

2♠: Strong Acol 2 etc

 

Is this treatment common?

I am not sure, which Multi version is more common, but

the way I learned to play the Multi, based on Acol influenced

books was

 

2D = Weak in the majors or strong twos in the minors or

a strong NT range (23-24).

The NT option gets quite often modified to another

range, or gets complety dropped in favour of the

strong 4441 hand.

 

Incooperating 23-24 in 2D, makes the seq.

 

2C - 2D

2NT

 

a gameforcing sequence, which it is not in classical Acol.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Feegle]

My partner & I play the multi in the Acol Club.

Ours incorporates a 20-22 'balanced' hand with a 5-card major. This means you don't have to open hands like:

♠Ax ♥AKJxx ♦KQxx ♣Ax

with 1♥.

[paulg]

I'm not a fan of Acol Strong Twos. However I did teach my wife to play Acol some twenty years ago and, for reasons I cannot fathom, they were in the simple system we started with.

 

Now she does not play a lot of bridge, but over the years we have migrated to 5-card majors, 2/1 style with a 2+♣ and a strong 1NT.

 

But the one convention she refuses to give up are her strong twos. Every time I mention the possibility, they will come up twice during the session. They seem to fit in quite well with our light opening style, removing the strain from jump rebids.

 

And, whatever the opponents say, they do make certain hands a lot easier to bid -- which is why the bidding competitions are full of problems that would be opened with an Acol Strong Two.

 

Paul

[NickRW]

THanks all - v helpful. I think I'll just put Benji Acol in my profile to save on future hassle.

 

If you play Acol with a multi 2D, is this how the opening goes at the 2 level:

 

2♣: v strong, 23+ hcp

2♦: Weak 2 in ♥ or♠ or 4.4.4.1 strong

2♥: Strong Acol 2, hand of power and quality

2♠: Strong Acol 2 etc

 

Is this treatment common?

Putting the strong 4441s into the multi was the original version. I like it personally, but I don't think it is common anymore. More usual is to lump in a strong two in either minor and a NT range.

 

If you do that, then leaving 2H/2S as strong is the simplest solution for what to do with those in Acol - or, if you're really into weak bids, you can maybe shove them into 2C (probably means you're going to have to think of rebidding 3H/3S over 2D with a genuine GF in the majors). That then leaves 2H/2S free for Dutch or Polish style weak 2 suited bids.

 

Some Acol players have virtually gone American playing similar 2 level openers to SAYC - but maybe using 2D as an Ekren style bid.

 

Nick

[helene_t]

if you're really into weak bids, you can maybe shove them into 2C (probably means you're going to have to think of rebidding 3H/3S over 2D with a genuine GF in the majors).

Nonono! If 2♣ covers game-forcing as well as almost-gameforcing hands,

2♣-2♦

2M

is forcing. You can either play a super-negative 2♥ response, or open the almost-gameforcing hands at the 1-level, or you can play some second negative, say

2♣-2♦

2♠-2NT*

3♠

would be nonforcing.

[NickRW]

if you're really into weak bids, you can maybe shove them into 2C (probably means you're going to have to think of rebidding 3H/3S over 2D with a genuine GF in the majors).

Nonono! If 2♣ covers game-forcing as well as almost-gameforcing hands,

2♣-2♦

2M

is forcing. You can either play a super-negative 2♥ response, or open the almost-gameforcing hands at the 1-level, or you can play some second negative, say

2♣-2♦

2♠-2NT*

3♠

would be nonforcing.

Yeah - 2H as double negative is one possible way round it. But that is again something one can't take for granted with a pick up partner.

 

Nick

[helene_t]

Yeah - 2H as double negative is one possible way round it. But that is again something one can't take for granted with a pick up partner.

Agree with that, but with a pick up partner it's probably better to play 2♣ as GF. Otherwise one would have to make agreements about which follow-ups can be passed. Certainly

2♣-2♦

2M

has to be forcing - how else would you bid an 11-trick two-suited hand? Because

2♣-2♦

3M

must be very specific, I would assume a suit playable opposite a void, demanding a cue bid.

[shintaro]

:unsure:

 

Lets keep Acol of the Steam or Dinasour variety these Weak 2's should be banished

 

Play the proper Acol as was intended

 

Or Play Asylum whist if you wish instead

 

But please don't call it Acol

 

:blink:

[NickRW]

:P

 

Lets keep Acol of the Steam or Dinasour variety these Weak 2's should be banished

 

Play the proper Acol as was intended

 

Or Play Asylum whist if you wish instead

 

But please don't call it Acol

 

:P

Well, if you're a purist.

 

But on this EBU page http://www.ebu.co.uk/lawsandethics/misc/conventioncards.htm there are several different pre-filled in cards - all described as some form of "Acol". If the EBU themselves use the term "Acol" slightly loosely, what are the rest of us to do?

 

Nick

[Gerben42]

The 2-level bids do not suddenly make something "not Acol". It is not a system where every bid is defined, instead it's a framework on which you can build your own stuff.

 

But to call it Acol it will need at least these three ingredients:

 

4-card majors

light 2-over-1 respondes

weak NT

 

If you play that 1♠ promises 5 cards, you're probably playing Swiss Acol.

If you play a strong NT and bid 4-card suits up the line, you're probably playing Dutch Acol.

[Finch]

But to call it Acol it will need at least these three ingredients:

 

4-card majors

light 2-over-1 respondes

weak NT

1. Yes

2. Yes

3. NoNoNo the NT range does not define Acol, it was originally a strong NT system, then a variable NT for a while

 

The fundamental part of Acol is that it is a natural, limit bidding system.