[The_Badger]

Sorry everyone if I have caused offence and opened a can of worms here: I had a bad day at the 'office' yesterday

What annoyed me about this post was that Liversidge was told "afterwards by one player that he was lucky because he didn't follow best practice..."

I do normally read everyone's posts thoroughly before replying, but in this instance speed read them. Thanks Alex (Slothy) for agreeing with me, and for mike777 at least being honest (and making me laugh with 'Houston we may have a problem')and mentioning he doesn't know Acol. And yes, gwnn, I appreciate your input and recognise that many Dutch players play Acol regularly. And, for everyone else's comments, it's a bridge democracy and everyone is entitled to their view

For those who don't know, Acol is that old-worldly 4-card system that us Brits and many nationalities still play, but it is a tidy little system that has been thoroughly usurped by the reign of 5-card majors - and I fully understand why 5-card majors are deemed so important. However...

...it follows the principles of length before strength, and bidding 4 card suits up the line. It is quite specific how you bid different-shaped hands. And it also allows you to respond at the 2 level in a minor to a major suit 1 level opening with as little as 8 HCPs and a 4 card suit. The bidding is designed to find a fit, whether it be major or minor at the lowest level.

By the way - and I will have a little rant about this - players who say they play Acol with 5 card majors AREN'T technically playing Acol. They may be playing a weird hybrid of Standard American and Acol, but it ain't true Acol.

But the point of my post is that it may be old-fashioned to open 1♣ with Liversidge's hand, but Jimmy Cayne's team who play 2/1 always seem to do so. And his system has been tweaked and tweaked until it is virtually watertight. And who is on his BBO team: Benito Garozzo, Michael Seamon, Dano di Falco, Thomas Bessis, Cedric Lorenzini and others. So, if they, with their 5 card major opening bids, open 1♣ with Liversidge's illustrated hand, who are we - including me - to argue?

And yes, the opponents can make life difficult if you open 1♣ but that's life. The interesting thing about Liversidge's hand is that (as far as I can see) nobody has evaluated it with a Kaplan and Rubens count. To me it looks a bit better than a standard 14 count. So opening 1♠ is borderline, with a possible high reverse of 3♣ on the next round, or a more conservative 2♣ if partner responds 1NT.

Another can of worms...maybe I should go fishing

[helene_t]

I used to open 1c with hands like this but got fed up with partner freebiding 1nt or 3nt and the spades suit was lost. I realize that playing acol where a 2s rebid is non forcing makes 1S less attractive so maybe it would make sense to open 1c if spades are bad. This spade suit is adequate for bidding twice but even with a worse suit, opening spades seems to work most of the time.

Make sure that partner knows that he is allowed to raise to 2S with threecard support

[Vampyr]

 mike777, on 2015-March-21, 01:26, said:

If 2d does not promise a rebid over 2s then let me know.
Houston we have a problem.

A 2♦ response does not promise another bid.

[lrussell]

Two considerations:
1. If you play the sequence 1♠ - 2♦ - 3♣ shows extras then minimum 5♠/5♣ hands should be opened 1♣
2. The quality of suits might come in to play as well. With ♠Jxxxx/♣AQJxx I'd open 1♣ and with ♠AQJxx/♣Jxxxx I bid 1♠

The example hand I'd open 1♠

[gwnn]

 The_Badger, on 2015-March-21, 04:25, said:

And yes, gwnn, I appreciate your input and recognise that many Dutch players play Acol regularly. And, for everyone else's comments, it's a bridge democracy and everyone is entitled to their view

(snip)

By the way - and I will have a little rant about this - players who say they play Acol with 5 card majors AREN'T technically playing Acol. They may be playing a weird hybrid of Standard American and Acol, but it ain't true Acol.

Don't come to the Netherlands then, you'd be livid after just a session of bridge at any club

[slothy]

you right vampyr

lol i meant high reverse

[redbird97]

I typically open 1!C with hands I am not prepared with make an excursion to the 3 level on. Even when playing 2 over 1 GF, I play 1!S-2!D-3!C shows extras.

[mike777]

ok...this is a rather old fashion bidding idea but with a minimum 5-5 in spades and clubs such as in OP start with 1c.
With stronger 5-5 start with 1s.

[Zelandakh]

 The_Badger, on 2015-March-21, 04:25, said:

By the way - and I will have a little rant about this - players who say they play Acol with 5 card majors AREN'T technically playing Acol. They may be playing a weird hybrid of Standard American and Acol, but it ain't true Acol.

This statement is like saying that a pair using a 14-16 NT range are not playing Precision. The first version of Acol I learnt used 5 card majors and a 16-18 NT. 5 card major Acol is a perfectly recognisable system, as is Swiss Acol with a 5 card spade. Certainly the original Acol used 4 card majors and a variable NT range - does that mean any variation from this is not "true Acol"? I guess that would surprise a lot of players around the world!

For the other questions raised, a 2 over 1 response does not promise a rebid in Acol, although there are variants where 1X - 2Y; 2X (X>Y) is forcing for a round (I guess these are not "true Acol" either). Note also that there are plenty of good players that think having this auction as forcing for a round creates at least as many problems as it solves and prefer the traditional (non-forcing) approach. There is an interaction here with the 15+ NT rebid range that makes the situation different from a 5 card major-strong NT system.

1X - 2Y; 3Z (X>Y>Z) always promises extras in Acol; indeed I cannot think of any natural system with unlimited openings where this is not the case. The fact that a minimum hand would need to rebid 2♠ rather than 3♣ does not in itself mean that 1♣ is automatically better, so the statement here with "should" is also overly strong.

A 1NT response to 1♣ traditionally shows 8-10hcp without a 4 card major. Some pairs also exclude a 4 card diamond suit making it something of a rare bird. Similarly, it is possible to define a 3NT response tightly to avoid it presenting a problem on hands of this type.

What wank writes is probably the most popular treatment above a certain level, which is essentially a shortened form of some of the posts written earlier. That does not mean it is the only playable method and many writers simplify things, especially when presenting material recommended for beginners. What I would suggest above everything is thinking about how the auction might go before choosing the opening bid, essentially planning your rebid. With a distributional hand, especially when weak, it is wise to expect competition and plan accordingly. That leads to understanding and a faster rate of development than simply following rules blindly.

[gordontd]

 P_Marlowe, on 2015-March-20, 12:18, said:

Just to add something with regards to the Acol context:

It may no longer be fashionable, but it was quite common to open 1C with 4333 (4spades),
assume now, the auction goes

1C - ?
1S

Partner now knowes only about 7cards, 3+ clubs and 4+ spades, in other words he knowes nothing
worth while.

I don't think those who play that style would usually rebid 1♠ with those hands - they would rebid 1NT.

[Vampyr]

 Zelandakh, on 2015-March-22, 06:17, said:

there are variants where 1X - 2Y; 2X (X>Y) is forcing for a round (I guess these are not "true Acol" either). Note also that there are plenty of good players that think having this auction as forcing for a round creates at least as many problems as it solves and prefer the traditional (non-forcing) approach.

I once had a partner who made me play 2/1 forcing to 2NT. This seemed to me to have all the disadvantages of Acol and 2/1 GF with none of the advantages of either.

[Vampyr]

 Zelandakh, on 2015-March-22, 06:17, said:

1X - 2Y; 3Z (X>Y>Z) always promises extras in Acol; indeed I cannot think of any natural system with unlimited openings where this is not the case. The fact that a minimum hand would need to rebid 2♠ rather than 3♣ does not in itself mean that 1♣ is automatically better, so the statement here with "should" is also overly strong..

Forgive my shocking ignorance, but isn't one of the advantages of 2/1 GF that you can bid out your shape w/o needing extra values?

[mike777]

Most who play 2/1 play that you need extras for say:

1s=2d
3c

with less they often rebid 2s with only 5.

However there are many who play 1s=2d=3c does not promise extras. One assumes pard has a minimum which he often will have. Two suited hands in the range of roughly 14-16 can be tough. A 2s rebid will promise 6s here.


As I suggested a much older bidding style is to open 1c and rebid spades twice with a minimum such as in the OP and 5-5. With stronger start with 1s.

[Zelandakh]

 Vampyr, on 2015-March-22, 09:33, said:

Forgive my shocking ignorance, but isn't one of the advantages of 2/1 GF that you can bid out your shape w/o needing extra values?

By far the most popular style is for 1X - 2Y; 3Z to show extras and bid, for example, 1X - 2Y; 2X - 2NT; 3Z with the minimum hand. Extras here is not the same as Acol of course, especially with 5-5 shape.

[Lovera]

 nekthen, on 2015-March-20, 07:37, said:

I would even open 1♠ with 5♠ and 6♣. You can never persuade partner you have 5♠ otherwise. Either the opps preempt you or partner does and usually the major scores better, if say partner has 3♠ and 4♣. Sometimes you will miss out, but I would really like to see the North hand before judging whether it was bad luck or bad bidding to miss 6N after opening 1♠

It may be that you just judged the hand better than the field.

About it you may see my posts in "Reverses" by kenberg (General bridge discussion) http://www.bridgebas...post__p__859307

[kuhchung]

I'm way late, but I once agreed to play with someone who liked opening 1C with 5-5 blacks.

This was the auction, no interference
1C 1H
1S 2H

He had a stiff heart and no extras and didn't know what to bid. I had 3 spades and 6 hearts and a weak hand, and we played in the 6-1 instead of the 5-3 which was way better.

[1eyedjack]

The danger in opening 1C is that you may not get an opportunity to show the 5th Spade. Nekthen's statement in post #9 that you will "never" be able to show the 5th Spade is an overbid. Generally speaking, rebidding spades twice would show a 5th Spade (and at least as long Clubs). Often you will be able to bid them twice and, Spades being the boss suit, prospects for this are as good as they will ever get. But sometimes not, at least not as safely as by opening 1S, especially if the auction gets contested. Furthermore, you may find yourself showing extra values if you bid the Spades twice in circumstances where you are not forced to bid again. Which is fine and dandy *if* you have the extra values (in which case also the likelihood of the opponents freezing you out may be reduced).

The danger in opening 1S is that the Club suit may get lost entirely. Again that is less likely the stronger that you are, partly because with extra strength you may have enough to commit to the 3 level to show them, and partly because with extra strength you may be less likely be forced there by oppo (or by CHO for that matter).

In my experience the modern thinking seems to be that the possibility of losing the 5th Spade, however remote, is the greater danger (possibly lower frequency, but higher total cost when frequency is multiplied by effect), and most will now open 1S. But any expert worth his salt should admit that there will be hands where having opened 1C would gain.

Whether on the actual hand the other tables should perhaps still have found slam despite opening 1S, we can only say if we have the entire hand, but my inclination is that if responder has enough for slam in NT, there may be a route there via 1S.

PS just realised that this is another Lovera necro-thread. Unfermented this time - only 6 months old

[steve2005]

I know in theory is ok to open 1♣ but most times I do the ♠ get lost.

[sfi]

A long time ago several of us discussed this topic until 4am at a nationals. We came up with three hand types (all 5/5 in the blacks):
- minimum, where you want to make sure you mention the major. Here you open 1S and rebid spades if necessary. Here you may have to give up on clubs, but at least you show the 5 card major.
- intermediate, where you have enough strength to bid a couple of times. Here you open clubs and bid spades twice.
- maximum, where you are comfortable with a high reverse even after interference. Here you open 1S planning to rebid 3C next round.

I didn't play it very much, but it still seems like a good set of agreements.

[Lovera]

1eyedjack in post #37 said " PS just realised that this is another Lovera necro-thread. Unfermented this time - only 6 months old " but it must not considered so because i have taken the occasion that netkhen said (see #35) to promove my posts in Reverses by kenberg, bye.