[Carvalho_A]

I I came upon this system that seemed quite good, but i couldn't find any (easily accesible) information on it. I havn't been playing long so so it may be complete rubish(please corect me if i'm wrong).

The theroy goes like this.
In sayc you are put in a very dificult situation with 4432and 4423 (and such), often having partner alert that a one club bid may have as few as two clubs.

Now if you play a 1♥ opening as being either a 5cm or 4-4 in the majors, this problem seems eradicated.
the only awquard hand is 3433 and 4333 (note diamonds are always at least four!)
and most of the time, a 1 club bid will be at least four, and if not we can always re bid 1nt.
Further this system seems even better when playing a weak notrump because because we dont lose a posible heart fit from opining 1 nt, and that 1 club bid can be replaced with a 1nt opening. if 15-17 the posible 3 card 3 club suit seems less dangerous too.

As for partners responses if he has 4 spades he bids 1♠, 4 hearts 2♥, a flat hand 1nt.

Might need some kinks worked out of it, but is it just me or does this seem suprior to ordinary 5cm?

[Carvalho_A]

I rather have somethings thats efective and a little less competitive, but are there any other problems with it... and why is there no information on it, or if there is where can i find it?

[Stephen Tu]

This approach is taken in "Biedermeier", sometimes called Dutch Acol AFAIK. Also seen in other European countries. It's just not common at all in U.S. thus you won't find American literature on it. Note "SAYC" (which is a *specific version* of the general class of systems in the "Standard American" family, the generic term for all versions is simply "SA", a great many online bridge players don't understand the difference) specifies 1d opening on 4432 exactly, opening 1c on 2 with that shape is done by some subset of SA players but it's a small minority.

It's not very popular because 5cM is relatively easy & popular, and you simply don't get in a ton of trouble opening 1m on those 4423 hands all that often because of the bias towards reaching major and NT contracts (not to mention most of your competition is playing 5cM so even if it leads to poor result you often break even). Plus you are now dealing w/ different response structures for 1s/1h which is more complicated for beginners.

If you are going to allow 4cM in your M openings, then I feel it's better to do it more aggressively and open the M on 4333 and 4x(x4) hands so you get the preemptive effect, since you are giving up the constructive bidding advantages of promising 5.

Besides if you are still opening 1c on 4333, esp. in competition you still have trouble knowing whether you can support clubs even if you exclude 4423.

[skjaeran]

Jlall, on Jul 13 2008, 04:27 AM, said:

Some people do indeed play this style. Most people feel that the advantages offered in competitive bidding by having a 1H opener promise 5 outweighs the losses of a more frequent short club, but this is definitely not an outrageous or bad stlye. You do need to recognize that by "solving" one problem you are creating new ones.

Well, that really depends on where you start out!

In Norway 4cM was the norm in the olden days (that's before I started playing). And unlike in UK, the norm was up-the-line bidding, opening the lowest of two 4-card suits. Thus 4-3-3-3 was the only hand with 4-card spades that was opened 1♠. In the 70s, a standard system evolved, where 1♠ promised 5 and you opened 1♣ with 4-3-3-3.

This was the norm (and still is in fact for most players) up to the early 90s, when some (juniors mostly) started playing 1♥ showing 5, unless 44M. Thus 4-3-3-3 and 3-4-3-3 opened 1♣ and 1♦ promised 4 (as before).

This is very easy to play (for those coming from 4c♥, probably harder for 5cM players). Not raising partners spades always promice 5c♥. Only in competitive sequences you might be unable to sort out wheather opener has 44M or 5c♥, and only occasionally - mostly you're able to sort this out.

[FrancesHinden]

This approach is quite popular in England, where a 1S opening is a 5-card suit, and a 1H opening is either a 5-card suit or 4-4 in the majors.

Also popular is simply lower of two 4-card suits, where you also open 1M with 3433 and 4333. For strong no-trumpers sometimes this is extended to opening 1 of a minor with a weak NT, and 1 of the major with 18-19 balanced.

It works OK but as others have said is virtually unknown in the US.

It's actually the way I was originally taught to play, but then I was subverted into 5CM world by the man I married.

Quote

I was thinking more along the lines of a sequence such as 1H 3S ?

If it goes 1H (3S) partner is pretty unlikely to be 4-4 in the majors.

But this is the same problem as a highly competitive auction after 1m (3S) except you get an advantage playing 4CMs as partner's minors are more likely to be genuine.

[Carvalho_A]

Just thought i'd say thanks for all the responses, given me a lot to yhink about. Infact i come from england but only started playing a lot in portugal, so i was taught acol and then ended up on 5cm and now this system seems like a good compromise with, a minumum of weakneses... As people have said, the only problems are in competitive auctions, and working out the correct responder bids and rebids.
What it defiantly does seem good for, is people who play five card majors and a weaknotrump, who dont always get in to the heart contract due to opening 1nt 12-15 on a 44 hand

[helene_t]

Carvalho_A, on Jul 13 2008, 06:25 PM, said:

What it defiantly does seem good for, is people who play five card majors and a weaknotrump, who dont always get in to the heart contract due to opening 1nt 12-15 on a 44 hand

But if you play a weak notrump, you have to open 1NT with the 4432/4423 hands with 12-14 points anyway, no matter if 1♥ promises 4 or 5.

The reason is that if it goes
1♥-2♣
?

2NT will now show 15+ points, while 2♠ will be a reverse.

FWIW I think that if you play 4-cards up the line, 1M will almost promises 5 and since it's more important to be accurate about the major suits than the minor suits, those who open the lower of two 4-cards should really play 5-card majors. But apparently there are some good players, especially in Scandinavia (and Cascade on this forum) who play 4-card majors and open the lower of two 4-cards. So I suppose it has merits somehow.

[plaur]

Why is suit quality not mentioned? While 4-card majors has some disadvatages over 5-card majors, isnt flexibilty regarding suit quality one advantage that should be utilized?
AKTx
Kx
Kxxx
Jxx
Playing 15-17 NT and 4-card majors up-the-line, open this hand 1♠ and rebid 2NT over partners 2/1. (2/1 Acol style, so 2NT is nonforcing)

[NickRW]

helene_t, on Jul 14 2008, 12:28 PM, said:

FWIW I think that if you play 4-cards up the line, 1M will almost promises 5 and since it's more important to be accurate about the major suits than the minor suits, those who open the lower of two 4-cards should really play 5-card majors. But apparently there are some good players, especially in Scandinavia (and Cascade on this forum) who play 4-card majors and open the lower of two 4-cards. So I suppose it has merits somehow.

I can't see the point of playing 4cM and then opening 4 carders up the line. It makes the majors virtually always 5 anyway - might as well go the whole hog and open 5cM anyway - or play 4cM and open the higher (except the 4/4 majors) to get the pre-emptive effect and find the 4/4 fits straight away. Do one or the other - 4 carders up the line seems a pointless compromise to me.

Perhaps someone can advance an argument in favour of it, but I'd take a lot of convincing.

Nick

[NickRW]

plaur, on Jul 14 2008, 12:43 PM, said:

Why is suit quality not mentioned? While 4-card majors has some disadvatages over 5-card majors, isnt flexibilty regarding suit quality one advantage that should be utilized?
AKTx
Kx
Kxxx
Jxx
Playing 15-17 NT and 4-card majors up-the-line, open this hand 1♠ and rebid 2NT over partners 2/1. (2/1 Acol style, so 2NT is nonforcing)

Playing 4cM with strong NT (or even slightly strong like 13-15) plus the usual Acol style of 2/1 with 9+ means that you can end up in 2NT on a combined 21 count. I find this to be unacceptable in any system. To my mind, if you want a strong NT, then you either have to play 5cM or make your 2/1 responses at least game invitational. The latter has much to recommend if you mainly play IMPs as I see it.

Nick

[SoTired]

Since this is B/I, I will suggest that you play 5-card majors (5cM). They are simple to bid, easy to learn, and easy to teach. In addition, when you advance you need only modify them.

Goren used to have an entire chapter devoted to which suit to open. 5cM is a single rule with an exception that some ignore (even experts).

Rule: If you have a 5cM, open your highest ranking 5cM, otherwise bid your best minor.
Exception: Bid a 6-card minor before a 5cM.

Don't worry about suit strength, points in suit, or any other honor consideration. Let experts re-evaluate hands based on honor location. For most players, total HCP and suit lengths is all that matters.

BTW, "best minor" means longest, so you will always have at least 3-cards in the minor you open. And 80% of the time, opener will have 4+cards in the minor, so best minor is not such a big deal.

[fromageGB]

NickRW, on Jul 14 2008, 07:56 AM, said:

To my mind, if you want a strong NT, then you either have to play 5cM or make your 2/1 responses at least game invitational.  The latter has much to recommend if you mainly play IMPs as I see it.

When my partnerships abandoned 4cM Acol in favour of 5cM we initially tried 2/1 responses as game invitational, but had huge problems coping with continuations. After a number of months we bit the bullet and played proper 2/1 GF. Much easier to handle. Incidentally, we play 2/1 with a mini NT, not strong !

As far as the initial question goes, though, I can't really see the problem with keeping 1M as guaranteed 5 card, and opening a club on those other hands. You can develop more complex methods of replies to always find the best major fit, we play a variation of transfer walsh, but the best pair in our club simply have an artificial diamond reply which denies a 5 card major, then opener bids his 4 card major(s) up the line.

Having 1M as 5 cards guaranteed makes it much, much simpler to find the right contract, with or without opposition bidding. Constructive bidding and preemption are both pretty hit and miss if you don't know opener's length.

[fromageGB]

Carvalho_A, on Jul 13 2008, 12:25 PM, said:

What it defiantly does seem good for, is people who play five card majors and a weaknotrump, who dont always get in to the heart contract due to opening 1nt 12-15 on a 44 hand

Last night at the club there were 2 hands where a 4/4 heart fit was better in 2♥ than the vast majority of the field playing in 1NT. That's one reason a mini NT works well. With 10-12 you have the preemptive effect, and with 13-15 you open 1♣ and find these fits other (weak NT) people miss.

[Codo]

I have played "swiss acol" for some years. And really, the benefits from knowing that clubs are at least 3 and diamonds are at least 4 are much lower then the costs in competetive auctions when you are not able to raise hearts to the limit.
But this experience is just mine.

There are still many fine players who play 4 card majorse. But if you look at the world championships, 5 card majors are in an overwhelming majority. So what is good for the best should be good for the rest too.

[Gerben42]

Yesterday we played against one of Germany's top pairs (Bronze in Pau) and they played Swiss Acol. What surprised me more is that they played 11-13 NT in all positions and colours (danger!).

[skjaeran]

Codo, on Jul 16 2008, 09:14 AM, said:

There are still many fine players who play 4 card majorse. But if you look at the world championships, 5 card majors are in an overwhelming majority. So what is good for the best should be good for the rest too.

In our reigning world and european champions teams we had six pairs. Two of them (Grøtheim-Tundal and Brogeland-Lindqvist) played 5-card majors (G-T playing Viking Club). The rest played natural systems with 5c♠ 4c♥.

[Codo]

skaeran, on Jul 16 2008, 07:59 PM, said:

Codo, on Jul 16 2008, 09:14 AM, said:

There are still many fine players who play  4 card majorse. But if you look at the world championships, 5 card majors are in an overwhelming majority. So what is good for the best should be good for the rest too.

In our reigning world and european champions teams we had six pairs. Two of them (Grøtheim-Tundal and Brogeland-Lindqvist) played 5-card majors (G-T playing Viking Club). The rest played natural systems with 5c♠ 4c♥.

Our best pair in pau plays swiss acol, but I think that some captains did research about the systems and 5 card majors had been in a great majority?

(This does not make 5 card major systems better, but it makes it useless to reinvent the wheel again and try for something fancy instead of sticking to the standard here.)

[NickRW]

fromageGB, on Jul 15 2008, 08:51 PM, said:

When my partnerships abandoned 4cM Acol in favour of 5cM we initially tried 2/1 responses as game invitational, but had huge problems coping with continuations. After a number of months we bit the bullet and played proper 2/1 GF. Much easier to handle. Incidentally, we play 2/1 with a mini NT, not strong !

Yeah. I bow to your experience of it. My point was that 4cM is quite playable with weak NT (indeed, for MP, arguably better than just playable). But if you shift your NT range higher it gives problems.