What should the correct auction have beeen

[Liversidge]

[hv=pc=n&w=saqj97hkt74dkj7ca&e=shq98dt864ckq9763&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1sp1np2hppp]266|200[/hv]

 

A real misfit, but should the bidding been different. We play Acol, weak no trump.

[Cyberyeti]

This is a difficult hand, and even more difficult in that I don't know where I want to be seeing both hands.

 

Basically W has a choice between 2♥ and 3♥ playing UK standard methods and I think it's a close decision.

[eagles123]

Good auction, well done.

[eagles123]

Good auction, well done. ps I disagree with Cyber imo E east has the closer decision

[Cyberyeti]

Good auction, well done. ps I disagree with Cyber imo E east has the closer decision

 

Well AQJ9x, KJ10x, KJx, A would be a clear 3♥ in my book which is not far from the original hand which is why I said it was close. As it is, game is great opposite the right flattish 5 count (10x, QJxx, Qxx, xxxx).

 

If I was going to bid with the E hand it would be a WTO into 3♣ rather than raising hearts

[Liversidge]

Well AQJ9x, KJ10x, KJx, A would be a clear 3♥ in my book which is not far from the original hand which is why I said it was close. As it is, game is great opposite the right flattish 5 count (10x, QJxx, Qxx, xxxx).

 

If I was going to bid with the E hand it would be a WTO into 3♣ rather than raising hearts

 

In our methods a jump shift requires 19 HCP and I had 18 HCP. Like you I felt I was just tad short for 3♥, though I know from our research that some good players would have bid it with this hand shape. The guidelines from our references (Crowhurst, Brunner, Klinger) are that a non-reverse rebid in a new suit at the 2 level by opener shows anything form 11-18 HCP, responder should strain to find a bid unless he is very weak and has just managed to scrape a response together. On this hand responder had enough honour strength for a bid but unless he passed his only 2 level response would have been 2NT which was likely to fail with the misfit, or to go to the 3 level in clubs which was also unpromising with responder as declarer.

 

A good learning experience.

[helene_t]

if you require six points to respond (as most acol players do in my experience) then I think you should jumpshift with most 18 counts. you will end up in some 24 games. thats ok and better than missing 18+7 games.

[keithhus]

if you require six points to respond (as most acol players do in my experience) then I think you should jumpshift with most 18 counts. you will end up in some 24 games. thats ok and better than missing 18+7 games.

Helen,

I agree re jump shift (I have noticed on BBO that people do it with 16 points) . However, in this example would that be the end of the bidding or should east go on to H4? Thanks

[helene_t]

No, I think East's pass is normal.

[mycroft]

I would have been in 3NT and probably scored worse than you (possibly 4♥ which definitely would have scored worse than you). Of course, for me 1NT would be forcing (K/S, not Acol). This is not a 2♣ response to 1♠ in Acol, Shirley? I know they can be much weaker than this side of the Pond.

[Kaitlyn S]

if you require six points to respond (as most acol players do in my experience) then I think you should jumpshift with most 18 counts. you will end up in some 24 games. thats ok and better than missing 18+7 games.

Game on 18 opposite 7 is no bargain. Perhaps you want to be there routinely vulnerable at IMPs where you're getting 10 to 6 odds but unless you diagnose a major suit fit, I have no problem missing a game with 18 opposite 7.

[NickRW]

Game on 18 opposite 7 is no bargain. Perhaps you want to be there routinely vulnerable at IMPs where you're getting 10 to 6 odds but unless you diagnose a major suit fit, I have no problem missing a game with 18 opposite 7.

 

 

I don't think Helene is necessarily defending Acol, merely stating common practice. Certainly there is a slight difference between Acol and SA in this regard. SA with just 2C and 2N as strong opening bids puts the upper limit on a 1x opener a little higher than is the case with Acol. Thus SA players tend to respond with 5 counts or any Ace, Acol players with 6 (and even then some 6hcp 10 loser hands are hardly worth "getting out of bed for"). This makes Acol players able to reverse a point or so lighter than SA.

 

It is a relatively minor difference.

[Cyberyeti]

I don't think Helene is necessarily defending Acol, merely stating common practice. Certainly there is a slight difference between Acol and SA in this regard. SA with just 2C and 2N as strong opening bids puts the upper limit on a 1x opener a little higher than is the case with Acol. Thus SA players tend to respond with 5 counts or any Ace, Acol players with 6 (and even then some 6hcp 10 loser hands are hardly worth "getting out of bed for"). This makes Acol players able to reverse a point or so lighter than SA.

 

It is a relatively minor difference.

 

Well I think many to most Acol players are moving towards having only one strong 2suit bid nowadays, but what you describe used to be the case. The other issue is that Acol doesn't come with short minors, I suspect people playing SA don't fancy playing a 4333 opposite a 4441 in 1♣ so drag up a response.

[NickRW]

Well I think many to most Acol players are moving towards having only one strong 2suit bid nowadays

 

From what little I see of the tournament scene, I think you're probably right. I don't think that extends down to what is happening in clubs and what teachers are peddling - well - not where I am anyway.

[Liversidge]

if you require six points to respond (as most acol players do in my experience) then I think you should jumpshift with most 18 counts. you will end up in some 24 games. thats ok and better than missing 18+7 games.

My Acol references (Crowhurst, Brunner, Klinger) all say that a jump shift by opener after a 1 level response is unequivocally game forcing and requires 19+ HCP or 20 points including distribution, though at my local club many play that you just need 17 HCP, which has led to some heated discussions, along the lines of "rubbish" from one of the better players when I have mentioned it. Makes it a bit difficult for a newbie like me - do I try to persuade partner to follow our shared Acol bidding guidebook on this point - he also plays with another partner of the 17+ persuasion.

[Zelandakh]

I think the West hand is very close to a jump shift. For example, change the suit order to ♠KJ7 ♥AQJ97 ♦KT74 ♣A and give partner a 1♠ response to our 1♥ opening and I daresay everyone would jump shift to 3♦. Similarly if the ♣A was in a red suit instead of being a singleton.

 

Going low looks like the right decision on the actual hand though so it turns out to be a very good auction.

 

On the method where a jump shift shows 16+, I actually used that as a junior, not because I thought it is a good idea but rather because the only alternative my partner of the time would consider was an artificial method that was considerably worse. It kind of has some logic to it in that it avoids having a wide-ranging simply rebid, which uses concepts that are difficult for some players to grasp (false preference, etc) but the truth is that it is horribly inefficient giving you effectively more hand types in the jump than can possibly be handled sensibly. I would avoid getting into discussions with those players though - few have any real idea about bidding theory and fewer still are open to "new" ideas, so just smile and play it their way in an indy while making sure that your main partner is on the same page as you and understand why the standard method is better.

[rmnka447]

In most bidding systems, after a 1 of a major opener, 1 NT becomes a catch-all for hands not strong enough for any other bid.

 

I think East's 2nd round pass is well judged. Knowing the hand is a bit of a misfit, settling for a 7 card fit may not be perfect, but is better than making any further bid. Further bids risk getting much deeper "in the soup".

 

Since I don't know ACOL, I'll leave the discussion on what West should rebid to those that do.