[pbleighton]

I have read that ACOL makes some sequences (such as 1H:2D, 2H) non-forcing (for the reponder's rebid) which are forcing in SAYC, in order to accomodate somewhat lower strength requirements for 2/1 responses. Questions:

1) Would this appoach also work with light openers, say a decent 10 opener versus a decent 10 2/1?
2) In the NF sequence 1H:2D, 2H, would 2H deny GF values, and specifically be weak (and playing 4 card majors, will be 5 cards frequently). This would mean that with GF values you jump to 3H. Correct?
3) When I play SAYC, the 2/1 responder is forced through 2NT, i.e. 1H:2D, 2NT is NF (with 14-16 NT this would always be <= 13). This would also be NF?
4) What other sequences are not forcing?

Peter

[Free]

Quote

I have read that ACOL makes some sequences (such as 1H:2D, 2H) non-forcing (for the reponder's rebid) which are forcing in SAYC, in order to accomodate somewhat lower strength requirements for 2/1 responses. Questions:

1) Would this appoach also work with light openers, say a decent 10 opener versus a decent 10 2/1?
2) In the NF sequence 1H:2D, 2H, would 2H deny GF values, and specifically be weak (and playing 4 card majors, will be 5 cards frequently). This would mean that with GF values you jump to 3H. Correct?
3) When I play SAYC, the 2/1 responder is forced through 2NT, i.e. 1H:2D, 2NT is NF (with 14-16 NT this would always be <= 13). This would also be NF?
4) What other sequences are not forcing?

Peter

1. Light openers are difficult to control when playing acol. Therefore when I play acol, I open with rule of 20, and when less I also open with -7LTC. Since normal openers are usually -7LTC, partner can judge easy of the right contract. When opening even lighter, it might get dirty, but I haven't tried that.

2. Correct. If opener has a 1-5-3-4 or even 1-5-2-5 with minimal opening strength, he can't bid 3C, so he has to rebid his Hearts on a 5 card. After 1H-2C-2H, its also possible, because opener can have a 4-5-1-3. The only bidding that has no problems is 1S-2C-? Opener can rebid every suit he has on 2-level, bid 2NT or 3C.
This is also the reason why you open with a 4441 distribution the suit under the stiff when the stiff is H or D, and the open the middle 4 card when the stiff is C or S. Then you can always rebid something with lying as few as possible.

3. Exactly. Sayc is a similar natural system which just opens 5 card Majors and 3 cards minors. All natural responses are pretty compatible.

4. A new suit on 2-level below the opener's suit is also NF. Example: 1S-2D-2H isn't forcing. And even support of responder: 1S-2H-3H or 1H-2D-3D isn't forcing. Responder has no upper limit, opener shows minimal hand in these sequences.

Free

[pbleighton]

Free writes:
"4. A new suit on 2-level below the opener's suit is also NF. Example: 1S-2D-2H isn't forcing. And even support of responder: 1S-2H-3H or 1H-2D-3D isn't forcing. Responder has no upper limit, opener shows minimal hand in these sequences."

1) So with GF values and hearts the bidding would go 1S-2D-3H?
2) I understand 1S-2H-3H as NF - it just invites to game in hearts, and you would go to 4H with GF values. I have always had a problem, though, with 1H-2D-3D. This must include some GF hands, or else what do you do with (say) 3514 and 2515 GF (but not huge) shapes. The responder then has a difficult choice when he has not quite GF values. Just guess?

Peter

[Free]

Quote

Free writes:
"4. A new suit on 2-level below the opener's suit is also NF. Example: 1S-2D-2H isn't forcing. And even support of responder: 1S-2H-3H or 1H-2D-3D isn't forcing. Responder has no upper limit, opener shows minimal hand in these sequences."

1) So with GF values and hearts the bidding would go 1S-2D-3H?
2) I understand 1S-2H-3H as NF - it just invites to game in hearts, and you would go to 4H with GF values. I have always had a problem, though, with 1H-2D-3D. This must include some GF hands, or else what do you do with (say) 3514 and 2515 GF (but not huge) shapes. The responder then has a difficult choice when he has not quite GF values. Just guess?

Peter

1) Yes, jumping means FG, still describing your hand (so 5-4 S-H at this moment)

2) If you have another suit and FG, you bid it at 3-level. So with your example hands of 3514 and 2515, the bidding goes 1H-2D-3C-... Without FG hands, you might have to lie and bid 2H on a 5 card, or 2NT with a stiff in partner's suit.
After 1M-2D-3D-? or 1X (not C)-2C-3C-? you can start bidding controls when you hava a FG hand to still find 3NT, but you're not obligated to bid on. So the bidding can go 1H-2D-3D-3S*-3NT if opener has a C control (and 5-4 H-D) and responder has a S control, assuming you have control in the shown suits. This way you can still sign off in 4m or 5m, depending on if you see 4m as forcing or not.

[EricK]

Quote

I have read that ACOL makes some sequences (such as 1H:2D, 2H) non-forcing (for the reponder's rebid) which are forcing in SAYC, in order to accomodate somewhat lower strength requirements for 2/1 responses. Questions:

1) Would this appoach also work with light openers, say a decent 10 opener versus a decent 10 2/1?
2) In the NF sequence 1H:2D, 2H, would 2H deny GF values, and specifically be weak (and playing 4 card majors, will be 5 cards frequently). This would mean that with GF values you jump to 3H. Correct?
3) When I play SAYC, the 2/1 responder is forced through 2NT, i.e. 1H:2D, 2NT is NF (with 14-16 NT this would always be <= 13). This would also be NF?
4) What other sequences are not forcing?

Peter

Traditional Acol (sometimes known as Stone Age Acol) was a 4 card major, weak NT (or variable NT) system, with 2/1 only promising about 8 points. Openings could be light (eg KQTxxx Axx xxx x; AQxxx xxx Axxx x would be minimum openers) because weak 2s weren't used.

Limit bids were an integral part of the system, and almost all sequences were non-forcing (that's not to say that they were passed frequently, but partner always had the option of passing).

eg 1H 2D 2H showed minimum opener; 1H 2D 3H was very inviational but NF; 1D 1S 2H showed 15 plus (or more without a partial spade fit); 1H 2D 2NT was 15-16 balanced and NF; 1S 2D 2H showed 54 and less than GF values etc etc. If responder or opener wanted to GF they had to jump at some point.

More recent versions of Acol have upped the 2/1 requirement to about 10 points. As a result they play a few more sequences as forcing. 1S 2D 2NT is now GF; 1S 2D 2H is forcing for one round (but may pass partner's 2S preference). Most play a reverse as forcing for a round and a high reverse as GF. Also 1H 2D 3H would now be considered forcing by most Acol players.

The traditional system can require a lot of judgement on some hands, but it does work well. Light 2/1s allow you to find low point count double fit games very easily, and the 1NT response is also better defined. You generally give less information to the opponents than you would in SA, so even if the contracts are sometimes theoretically too high that doesn't seem to matter in practice.

Eric

[Free]

I'm not a fan of 1S-2D-2NT being forcing, and also not for 1S-2m-2H. It lets you rebid too much Majors with a 5 card...

[the hog]

Peter, EricK has pretty much hit the nail on the head. Virtually all of the Acol players I know, play that 2 level responses are forcing to 2N. Furthermore 1S 2m 2H is certainly 100% forcing in modern Acol. This makes sense as it does help in constructive bidding. Playing it as nf is just too much like trying to land on the head of a pin.
Some play that 1S 2m 3H shows a 5/5, others play it as a mini splinter. The latter treatment is most common in Australia.

Playing a 12-14NT
1S 2m 2N is 100% GF, as opener has shown 15-16, (or 15-18 if playing the wider range). To play this as nf is ridiculous. How often are you going to make exactly 8 tricks!

Cheers
Ron

[Free]

woops, forgot the NT-range... :