SAYC in competition

[Codo]

Hi Ben,

 

as you mentioned, that 3 Heart would show extras in Sayc and that pds second redouble will be done with many many hands:

Please name me the fountain of your wisdom, as I cannot find this issue in the write downs I have about SAYC.

 

So, in other words: Who says, that in SAYC it MUST be that way?

(I got to know SAYC as a very unspecific tool, so no idea, where I can found good notes about competetive bidding anyway).

 

Kind Regards

 

Roland

[inquiry]

Hi Roland,

 

My experience and understanding of SAYC (which stood for STANDARD AMERICAN YELLOW CARD) comes from when it was introduced to tournment play in the US decades ago. They actually had a prefilled out convention card that was printed on yellow paper instead of white (hence the name). In addition, there was some printed material explaining the theory behind introducing it and what you could modify (you could use strong twos or strong jump raises I think), and what you were not allowed to modify. Sadly my version of the written material is long lost. They even ran YELLOW card events where everyone had to play what was on the card.

 

I played in a couple of events LIMITED to players using yellow card (the only time I ever played yellow card in tournment play). Some were individual events, one of which I was lucky enough to win... and I have to admit to win an individual event you HAVE to be lucky. But anyway, SAYC, at least the way I learned it (when it was first invented, not as it morphed...by the way I think the ACBL no longer advocates SAYC because it morphed so much) is that jumps are strong, that bidding more shows extra. In other words, it was very Goren-like vanilla.

 

Thus, my experience with SAYC would suggest that 2over1 is right... 3H over 3D would show extra value and DBL of 3D would be for penalty (not takeout). This is why I DONT play SAYC unless my partner is unable or unwilling to play something else. With my regular partners I try to follow Robson/Segal rules and 3H would be competitive and DBL would be takeout...but I am fully aware that this is not how SAYC rules would go. I think in SAYC originally negative doubles for instance only went through 2Spades.

 

Ben

[Codo]

Hi Ben,

 

as a "no victim" of the ACBL I got to know SAYC much later and like it is now.

They have a very nice describtion of SAYC at ok-bridge, they had one, which differs slightly at swan and I guess that bbo basics is very close to what is played as SAYC today.

If my memory is right (which it is not often), there is nothing said about this special bidding sequence or at least about this kind of contersted bidding in any of these notes. (But correct me if I err).

 

I do know the history about SAYC quite well and I think that it was a real good try to find a very simple and easy system to get some tournements start for people who won´t play else. But it did not work as it was meant to be.

 

Anyway, I guess that if you agree "SAYC, pd?", it is nowadays more or less 5card major, 15-17 NT, weak twos and some easy gadgets like staymen and transfers.

But I guess too, that this is the thing we talk about: About SAYC like it is today and yes, that is very different from what it was.

So I for me can just accept your valid arguments for and against showing extra strength with a direct bid.

 

But I am sure, that, whenever I sit down with an unknown partner and this bidding will happen, I will have no clue, which way he will play. Because: There are no written notes about this issue.

 

Kind regards

 

Roland

 

P.S. I played some individuals and never won. I agree, that you need luck, but not just luck. You must be a very good player too. :)