non 2/1 auction

[eagles123]

yesterday i was bored and went to the club and was partnered with an 88 year old grump who only knew weak and 4 (not a problem)

 

anyway the auction went unopposed 1s 2d 2s 3s apparently this is non forcing wtf how is this even playable lol

[steve2005]

Sequences like that are why 2/1 is better. Not perfect just better.

[rmnka447]

At the end of the day, it's about whether you get to the right contracts or not that determines the viability of any bidding system.

 

While, like you, I believe 2/1 has some inherent advantages in bidding, those advantages aren't so overwhelming that a simpler bidding system can't at least be competitive. Most auctions aren't that complicated that any system has a big edge. And when there is a difference, the pair playing 2/1 must use the tools available effectively to ensure a better result.

 

I regularly play a simplified Standard American bidding system with a handicapped partner. Strong NTs, 4 suited transfers, simple Blackwood, negative doubles, limit raises and that's about it. (No Michaels, Jacoby 2 NT, splinters, 4th suit forcing, support doubles, or NMF at all.) Yet, we are still consistent winners in most competitions. I'll grant that there are times we have to guess where a pair with the right tools can make more informed decisions. But in the end, card playing skill and judgment are still the biggest factors in playing well.

 

OTOH, my favorite partner and I have played KS (essentially 2/1 with weak NTs,5 card majors) for 40+ years and have worked through just about every possible bidding situation. If we can't remember our agreements or run into something new, we know and trust how each other bid so well that it offers some huge advantages in understanding the situation and what partner is doing. We liken it to putting on a favorite pair of old shoes. There's a comfort level that fosters great pleasure and top notch performance.

[Zelandakh]

anyway the auction went unopposed 1s 2d 2s 3s apparently this is non forcing wtf how is this even playable lol

With slam interest you can manufacture a new suit at the 3 level. It means that auctions with very strong hands are often rather round-about. It also leads to the observation that taking a slower route means a stronger hand, which is one many club players unfortunately forget. In any case, this is part of the basis of traditional Acol, that we can make a variety of non-forcing calls in many situations and stronger hands have to find some alternative. There are good reasons why this approach has largely died out at high levels but it works well enough most of the time if you understand the way it works.

[helene_t]

Maybe you can make a strong jump shift first and then support afterwards? Some will say that "should" show 4-card support but I believe the strong hands with 3-card support are more problematic, since with 4-card support you can just use Jacoby 2NT.

[Tramticket]

Hi Rowland,

 

Sounds like you were being as grumpy as your partner! :)

 

Yes the auction described is non-forcing in Acol - although I don't think I've seen this auction very often. And yes, 3♠ is a very precise target to hit - it sounds like your partner is passing the buck!

[The_Badger]

Hi eagles123,

 

New bridge proverb: Never play bridge when bored (as you always get partnered by an ancient grump who plays a system out of the Stone Age). lol! :)

[ahydra]

It shows an INV hand with 3-card support - Axx Kx KJxxx xxx. How is that unplayable? Seems like a common hand type.

 

ahydra

[helene_t]

It shows an INV hand with 3-card support - Axx Kx KJxxx xxx. How is that unplayable? Seems like a common hand type.

 

ahydra

It is unplayable to have no way to show a forcing raise.

 

Of course the forcing raise doesn't have to be 3♠. You could play 4♣ as the forcing raise.

[gordontd]

yesterday i was bored and went to the club and was partnered with an 88 year old grump who only knew weak and 4 (not a problem)

 

anyway the auction went unopposed 1s 2d 2s 3s apparently this is non forcing wtf how is this even playable lol

Of course it's non-forcing in Acol. If you don't think it's playable, your "not a problem" comments seems out of place.

[fromageGB]

I think the weak 4ers I've played with would be showing 6 spades by the 2♠ rebid, no? Then the 3 card support would be bidding 4♠. I assume opener is showing a weak hand by the sequence, ie one not too strong for 1NT. Therefore it would be a 1NT open if a 4 card major, therefore the 1♠ open is 5, so the 2♠ is 6. Therefore the 3♠ is now GF.

 

I think I have demonstrated how I can't understand acol biding !

[Zelandakh]

I think the weak 4ers I've played with would be showing 6 spades by the 2♠ rebid, no?

 

I think I have demonstrated how I can't understand acol biding !

Quite so - what would you expect them to rebid with a weak 5♠4♣ hand?

[wank]

acol's good for matchpoints because you have lots of invitational bids (such as this one) to judge level more accurately. it's bad for imps because the lack of forcing bids makes it difficult to bid slam or explore less common games, e.g. 5m or a 5-2 major fit.

[Tramticket]

Quite so - what would you expect them to rebid with a weak 5♠4♣ hand?

 

Yes, the sequence 1S, 2C; 2S promises a six-card suit. But 1S, 2D; 2S will either be 6+ spades or 5-4 in spades and clubs (and lacking the values to reverse).

[Tramticket]

acol's good for matchpoints because you have lots of invitational bids (such as this one) to judge level more accurately. it's bad for imps because the lack of forcing bids makes it difficult to bid slam or explore less common games, e.g. 5m or a 5-2 major fit.

 

Agree. But to play Acol well you do have to work hard with partner to make sure you do understand the forcing bids available - if you put in the work there are more forcing bids available than appear at first sight. For example, in Rowland's sequence a new suit should be forcing and a new suit at the three level game forcing. Frances Hinden wrote a helpful article on these "third-suit forcing" sequences in the Aug 15 edition of English Bridge.

[jallerton]

Yes, the sequence 1S, 2C; 2S promises a six-card suit. But 1S, 2D; 2S will either be 6+ spades or 5-4 in spades and clubs (and lacking the values to reverse).

 

Only if you have the (relatively uncommon) agreement to open a weak NT on all 5M332 hands in range.

[Tramticket]

Only if you have the (relatively uncommon) agreement to open a weak NT on all 5M332 hands in range.

 

We do. But I agree that this is not universal.

[Vampyr]

LOL the title of the post is odd, since this was a 2/1 auction.

 

Anyway I had thought that the approach suggested by jallerton was played by the majority of players. Of course it could still be "relatively uncommon", since we do not know the answer to "relative to what?"

[Cyberyeti]

LOL the title of the post is odd, since this was a 2/1 auction.

 

 

As in not playing 2/1 GF.

[Vampyr]

As in not playing 2/1 GF.

 

I know, I just wish that people playing 2/1 GF would specify it as such, otherwise there is often ambiguity. Every single player bids 2/1 after all.

[Zelandakh]

I know, I just wish that people playing 2/1 GF would specify it as such, otherwise there is often ambiguity. Every single player bids 2/1 after all.

It is the same as "not playing reverses", "transfer to a minor" or "SAYC with 4 suit transfers", technically incorrect but everyone understands what is meant.

[fromageGB]

Quite so - what would you expect them to rebid with a weak 5♠4♣ hand?

I would have thought 2NT. It would seem the natural thing to me, but maybe I'm coming from a background where major length is more important to show than minors.

[Zelandakh]

I would have thought 2NT. It would seem the natural thing to me, but maybe I'm coming from a background where major length is more important to show than minors.

2NT would show 15+, the exact upper range depending on the version of Acol being used. Or how else are you planning to bid a strong NT hand?

[Finch]

As everyone else has said, this is how you show an invitational hand with 3-card spade support in Acol. Before you say it is 'unplayable', perhaps you would like to explain how else you show that hand type? 2/1 with a forcing NT responds 1NT; the 'default' 5CM approach is to jump directly to 3S with three card support but that has its own problems.

 

I play that auction as invitational with Jallerton. I promise you that it is playable. We play 1S-2D-2S-4C as a slam try with 3-card spade support, not necessarily club shortage. I've also seen people play 1S-2D-2S-4C as a 'cue bid' agreeing spades. Otherwise the slam try hands are a bit of a pain, but that's the problem with traditional light 2/1 Acol auctions.

[Vampyr]

the 'default' 5CM approach is to jump directly to 3S with three card support but that has its own problems.

 

...

 

...and should be avoided at all costs.