[cherdano]

Wow you really hate the forcing 1N, Adam

[MickyB]

awm, on Dec 23 2008, 05:35 AM, said:

MickyB, on Dec 17 2008, 01:02 AM, said:

SAYC and Acol having one vote between them is one vote too many. SAYC has literally no advantages when compared with 2/1 GF except rebid.

Some advantages for SAYC over 2/1 GF except rebid:

[snip]

(4) In SAYC, you can play in 2M sometimes when responder has invitational values. For example 1♠-2♣-2Red-2♠-Pass and responder has shown his 11 or so points yet you can still get out. In 2/1 GF except rebid responder starts 1NT and a major suit preference could be garbage, so you have to play at least 2NT.

Ok, maybe my original statement was perhaps, um, overzealous But is 1♠-2♣-2Red-2♠ actually NF in SAYC? I was under the impression that this is forcing as standard on the other side of the pond, if it is NF then my opinion of SAYC has just gone up...a little

[cherdano]

MickyB, on Dec 25 2008, 06:03 AM, said:

awm, on Dec 23 2008, 05:35 AM, said:

MickyB, on Dec 17 2008, 01:02 AM, said:

SAYC and Acol having one vote between them is one vote too many. SAYC has literally no advantages when compared with 2/1 GF except rebid.

Some advantages for SAYC over 2/1 GF except rebid:

[snip]

(4) In SAYC, you can play in 2M sometimes when responder has invitational values. For example 1♠-2♣-2Red-2♠-Pass and responder has shown his 11 or so points yet you can still get out. In 2/1 GF except rebid responder starts 1NT and a major suit preference could be garbage, so you have to play at least 2NT.

Ok, maybe my original statement was perhaps, um, overzealous But is 1♠-2♣-2Red-2♠ actually NF in SAYC? I was under the impression that this is forcing as standard on the other side of the pond, if it is NF then my opinion of SAYC has just gone up...a little

It is non-forcing in SAYC and shows 2 spades (there is a debate whether it shows 2 or 3, but Adam always wins that debate). It is non-forcing and shows 3 spades in "Standard American".
It is forcing in expert standard (as that is 2/1) and there is a debate whether it shows 2 or 3, in particular in the auction 1S 2C 2H 2S.

Cleared that up for you?

[awm]

MickyB, on Dec 25 2008, 07:03 AM, said:

But is 1♠-2♣-2Red-2♠ actually NF in SAYC? I was under the impression that this is forcing as standard on the other side of the pond, if it is NF then my opinion of SAYC has just gone up...a little

The auction that gets discussed sometimes, which is forcing in SAYC but NF in Acol is 1M-2X-2M. This is because SAYC has a rule that responder promises a second call after making a 2/1 bid (barring opener's rebid being at game level). This allows SAYC to use 2M as a waiting rebid on a wide variety of hands to hear more about what partner holds. It's a substantial advantage when opener has a good hand with six in the major (you don't have to rebid 3M and crowd your own auction) in exchange for a disadvantage when responder's 2/1 bid is very light and 2M is your last making spot.

Note that Acol 2/1 bids are lighter than SAYC ones -- SAYC 2/1 promises a good ten hcp or more (about two points shy of a game force) whereas Acol bidders seem to routinely make 2/1 bids about a queen lighter than this on a shapely hand.

[jdonn]

How does a thread called "What is best system" become a debate between SAYC and ACOL? Next think you know, I'll be the subject of a debate about the best looking bridge players.

[awm]

jdonn, on Dec 25 2008, 03:53 PM, said:

How does a thread called "What is best system" become a debate between SAYC and ACOL? Next think you know, I'll be the subject of a debate about the best looking bridge players.

Clearly because SAYC or Acol is the best system, depending which side of the ocean you live on?

[Codo]

jdonn, on Dec 26 2008, 05:53 AM, said:

How does a thread called "What is best system" become a debate between SAYC and ACOL? Next think you know, I'll be the subject of a debate about the best looking bridge players.

All good looking bridge players play Acol or Sayc.
Do you want to be an ugly nerd and play something different?