I Don’t Get It?

[BillPatch]

1. SAYC opens with 13 HCP. 2/1 opens with 12 HCP.

Charles Goren's Point Count Bidding was published in 1946. He

preached using Work's point count A=4, K=3, etc for NT

and shortness points (Void=3, singleton=2, doubleton=1)

added for suit contracts. Within 6 years this replaced

honor tricks as the standard method for contract bridge.

14 total points, or 13 with 2 quick tricks, constituted

a mandatory opening bid. The most common minimum opening bid was

a 4-4-3-2, the most common distribution, with 12 hcp, 1 point

for distribution, and 2 quick tricks.

 

This has been the standard for the u.s. bridge world ever since.

While as many as 15% of tournament bridge players may have

at one time adopted the one or more point higher point count

method of one immediate predecessor of 2 over 1, the Roth-Stone

system, at one time, and as many as 15% have experimented with a one

point lower limit, usually with the Precision Club, 12HCP and 2 QT

has remained the norm ever since.

 

I remember taking home the ACBL Yellow Card Booklet shortly after it came

out in 1987. I also played with one in 1996. It was featured in an indi-

vidual in a tournament in Cleveland in 2002. I have a copy of Ned Downey and

Ellen Pomer. Standard Bidding with SAYC, copyright 2005. I also have reviewed

the latest copy of the SAYC booklet at ACBL.com. The 13 HCP requirement for

an opening bid was not in any of these. Downey and Pomer agree with me that

12 hcp is the norm, recommending the use of Marty Bergen's rule of 20. My peers

who play in the ACBL would laugh at the 13 HCP requirement.

 

Thus, I assume that you are the recipient of s defective Yellow Card, unfit

for American consumption. I am sorry the ACBL dumped it on your country. Please

accept my apology. SAYC and most 2 over 1 styles have the same opening standards.

 

For furthur details on SAYC, I recommend the Downey and Pomer book, from the Master

Point Press, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. (I don't think any Canadians are involved in

the defctive yellow card dumping.) The latest yellow card booklet without the offensive

defect is available on the ACBL site for free download.

[32519]

 

Thus, I assume that you are the recipient of s defective Yellow Card, unfit for American consumption. I am sorry the ACBL dumped it on your country. Please accept my apology. SAYC and most 2 over 1 styles have the same opening standards.

 

For furthur details on SAYC, I recommend the Downey and Pomer book, from the Master

Point Press, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. (I don't think any Canadians are involved in

the defctive yellow card dumping.) The latest yellow card booklet without the offensive

defect is available on the ACBL site for free download.

 

The SAYC Stock Convention Card available on BBO for all to use clearly says 13+ to open the bidding, last updated on 16 March 2006. I have the 2006 SAYC Booklet. Page 3 says a minimum opening is 13-15 HCP. BBO and the booklet in my posession both would appear to be outdated according to your post.

[lowerline]

There are quite a few countries with 5-card major based systems regarded as "standard" for the relevant country e.g.

1. USA = SAYC

2. Germany = Forum D

3. France = French Standard

4. Poland = Polish Club

5. Italy = ?

6. Others?

7. Netherlands = Dutch ACOL?

 

Then you have variations of the "standard" system.

Add to that all the different gadgets that different partnerships add to the "standard" system, ending up with a system which is anything but the "standard." So what's the point of having a "standard" system for a country?

 

2/1 is the 5-card majors system probably with the biggest following. So why not just adopt 2/1 as the "standard" system for the relevant country? Much easier!

 

In the Netherlands the standard system is Biedermeijer Rood, which is basically a 4crd major system, but it offers you some choices to turn it into a 5crd major system.

All bridge players (of a certain level) are supposed to know the standard system of their country, making it easier to play with a pick-up partner or on the Internet.

 

As the most popular online bridge sites (like BBO) are predominantly American, lots of non-Americans have learned SAYC to be able to play online.

 

Steven

[blackshoe]

The idea behind Standard American Yellow Card was to provide a single system that "everyone" could play, so that in any given tournament, there would be no problems with "unusual" agreements - the SAYC card doesn't allow them. Bridge players being who they are, they took SAYC and said "I can do better than that" and changed things where SAYC specifically precluded such changes. Any such system is fine to play in most tournaments (but not ones in which the requirement is to play "Standard American Yellow Card"), but such a system is not "SAYC". It may be something similar, say "BBO SA", but it's not SAYC.

 

In the 2003 SAYC booklet, you were offered five choices as to agreements. All of these had to do with defensive carding. In the 2006 version of the booklet, these choices do not appear. The system is engraved in stone. The only thing you can add to a SAYC system card is defenses to opponents' conventions, such as unusual vs. unusual or Mathé or Truscott over Precision 1♣.

 

The range of a 1 of a suit opening in SAYC is not explicitly stated in the section on those openings. It is implied by the statement that opener's minimum rebid shows "13-15 points". Note that is "points", not "high card points", so a typical distributional minimum opening will likely have fewer than 13 HCP. BTW, the SAYC booklet does say that "judgement" may be applied, and hand evaluation is certainly a matter of judgement.

 

SAYC is not "standard" in North America or in the USA. The current "standard" here is shifting from "Standard American" (of which SAYC is a — rigid — variant) to "2/1 GF".

 

No one amongst the local bridge players I know plays SAYC in f2f bridge. I suppose they might play some variant of it online.