Club bridge in Germany

[squealydan]

My father lives in Germany (Dusseldorf area if it's relevant), and after talking bridge with me a bit he's showing some interest in taking the game up again after many years off. He's never played in Germany, and doesn't have the internet. (Yes, I know...)

 

I just wondered if anyone could tell me what system you'd expect a typical club player to be playing if you called up a club and found a pick-up partner? My Dad played a very old-school Goren-style system and I think I'll need to give him some guidance on more modern conventions. If anyone can point me to a website with this information my German is just about good enough to understand what I'd read and pass it along to my Dad (though not good enough to search the internet to find it myself...)

 

 

Thanks.

[Zelandakh]

The basic system in Germany is called Forum D. It is essentially a variant of SEF. In most clubs you can expect the majority to be playing this, a few pairs will be playing Forum D+ (a variant including some extra conventions) and you might see a pair or two playing each of Acol, Precision or SA. You can find a basic write-up here under Unterricht->FORUM D 2012 - Kurzbeschreibung. This is also the site of the local RA and includes the alerting rules and similar goodies.

[mgoetze]

Germany is really quite an unstandardised region as far as bidding goes. While I wouldn't argue with what Zel wrote in general, in Düsseldorf Acol (with Strong NT, Multi and Muiderberg) is somewhat more prevalent than elsewhere. Make of that what you will. ;)

[Vampyr]

Acol (with Strong NT, Multi and Muiderberg)

 

I am pretty sure this system has crossed the line in terms of what can be described as Acol!

[RMB1]

I am pretty sure this system has crossed the line in terms of what can be described as Acol!

 

Still leaves 4 card majors and 1x-2y-2x NF

[Vampyr]

Still leaves 4 card majors and 1x-2y-2x NF

 

Yes. Do you think that is enough?

[mgoetze]

And indeed even 1x-2y-3y nonforcing, which strikes me as one of the most distinctive features of Acol. Anyway I don't know a better way to describe what they play.

[MickyB]

I am pretty sure this system has crossed the line in terms of what can be described as Acol!

 

In that case, 4-card majors with a Weak NT and weak twos must have crossed the line too, surely?

[Vampyr]

In that case, 4-card majors with a Weak NT and weak twos must have crossed the line too, surely?

 

I don't know, because I don't know what the original version of ACOL was. I am pretty certain, though, that 4-card majors and Weak NT are pretty "standard" for Acol in the present day. So, while is true that Weak Twos are a deviation from basic Acol, such a system is closer to "standard" than one with different two-bids and a Strong NT. So as far as crossing the line, it definitely depends where you draw it.

[helene_t]

Sematics, seschmantics. An X is defined as a person who identifies himself as an X. Substitute for X any religious or ethnical category, or "Acol-player", for that matter.

 

By the way, I like the Spanish definition: "Acol" is a gambling 3NT opening.

[Zelandakh]

The original Acol had a variable NT. In England this changed to being weak throughout. In Holland it changed to being strong throughout; Düsseldorf Acol sounds like an offshoot from this. What is "standard" for Acol depends on which country you are living in. Most people living in England think the "current standard" can only refer to Modern English Acol but that is of course ridiculous. It is really the rules for defining when bids are forcing/non-forcing/invitational, or if you prefer the approach-forcing method, which defines Acol above everything else and all variants include this concept to some extent or the other.

[helene_t]

How can the approach-forcing method be characteristic of Acol? The principle goes back to Culbertson. I think tournament players have very similar ideas about when a new suit is forcing regardless of whether they play Acol or SA or SEF. But if you see club players bid

1♣-1♠

2♣-2♦

pass!

I think they are more likely to call their system "Acol" than to call it SEF or SA.

 

When people say that it characterizes Acol, don't they mean "Acol as opposed to Vienna"?

[MickyB]

Indeed. Acol strong NT is common in Manchester btw, I don't know if there are any other pockets of resistance in the UK.

 

I guess you could argue that "modern Acol with a weak NT" bears more resemblance to the original system than "modern Acol with a strong NT". Light 2/1s meant that 1S:2C, 2D and 1S:2C, 2N [showing 15-16 when NV I think] were non-forcing, but at least you didn't have to prepare your rebid unlike when playing strong NT - I understand that 4342 would bid 1S:2C, 2D or 1S:2H, 3H while 4243 would open 1D because it couldn't cope with a 2H response to 1S. Likewise 4-4 majors would open 1S and rebid 2H, while 4333 would open 1C because raising 2m on three in a 4333 wasn't acceptable. "Modern Acol strong NT" should use 11+ 2/1s which makes it hard for 1S:2D, 2S to be non-forcing.