[Draculea]

does anyone have experience playing acol (4 card major, weak nt) with 2/1 responses being game forcing?
would a system like that qualify as acol?

[P_Marlowe]

 Draculea, on 2018-September-24, 04:10, said:

does anyone have experience playing acol (4 card major, weak nt) with 2/1 responses being game forcing?
would a system like that qualify as acol?

The defining feature of Acol: 2/1 responses that are 1 round forces only.
You can play 2/1 responses being game force with 4 card major and weak NT,
but this is certainly not an Acol system.

[Tramticket]

 P_Marlowe, on 2018-September-24, 04:25, said:

You can play 2/1 responses being game force with 4 card major and weak NT, but this is certainly not an Acol system.

Acol can mean different things to different people, so it probably doesn't matter what you call it.

Two-over-one responses have tended to evolve and become stronger over the years - even in Acol. When I first started playing, Acol text books advised that a two-level, change-of-suit response promised 8+ HCP (forcing for one round). Most players now use the bid to show 10+ HCP (or occasionally a good 9+ HCPs) - the advantage being that it allows auctions such as 1♥, 2♣; 2NT or 1♥, 2♣; 2♠ to be forcing to game. I am aware that some players push this further still and play the two-over-one as "forcing for one round and promising a rebid" and other such agreements.

Clearly it would simplify further bidding if you were to make a two-over-one bid as forcing to game and I see no problems with handling this type of two-over-one auction. BUT the big problem comes with the hands that don't meet the criterion for a game-forcing two-level change of suit. You presumably have to dump these hands into the 1NT response. But now you can't play a non-forcing 1NT response because a range of 7 points (6-12 HCP) is too great to handle. Or maybe you want to put the hands in the range 10-12 into the 2NT response? But now you have both a 1NT response and a 2NT response which might be unbalanced. It simply will not work to have the two-level change of suit forcing to game and a non-forcing 1NT response.

So you have to consider playing a 1NT forcing response (as played in standard 5-card Major 2-over-1 systems). This creates further problems with your rebids. What do you rebid with ♠AQ98 ♥K43 ♦QJ4 ♣K97 after the auction starts 1♠, 1NT(forcing)? You can't rebid a four-card suit, so you must rebid one of the three-card suits. Indeed I think that you need an artificial 2♣ rebid over the forcing 1NT response ...

These artificial bids are moving a long way away from Acol and it seems to me that once you move this far you may as well embrace five-card majors!

I would be interested if anyone has made this work?!

[Kungsgeten]

I've played a lot of four card majors with a strong NT and 2/1 being game forcing. With a weak NT I think it's a bit harder. It seems awkward to respond a wide-ranging 1NT, because opener would need to bid again with the strong NT. Now this comes from a player who doesn't have much experience of a forcing 1NT response. This is awkward enough with 5 card majors, but seems even more so with four card majors. Perhaps you could rebid 2NT with 15-16, and 3NT with 17-19?

If I was playing a weak 1NT, I would not want to open 1M with 15+ balanced hands (even if playing five card majors).

I can say that strong NT, four card majors, and 2/1 GF works okay. You miss some games after 1M-1NT, but sometimes these games aren't making and sometimes you play 1NT instead of 2NT going down. It can be awkward for opener to decribe his hands after 2/1, but I can't really see how a strong NT and 2/1 F1 would solve this.

[Tramticket]

Hi Kungsgeten, I am interested in this reply:

 Kungsgeten, on 2018-September-24, 07:55, said:

It can be awkward for opener to decribe his hands after 2/1, but I can't really see how a strong NT and 2/1 F1 would solve this.

I fully agree that the auctions that start with a 2-over-1 must be easier to handle if the bid is forcing to game - you can bid naturally and not worry that the bidding can be dropped.

 Kungsgeten, on 2018-September-24, 07:55, said:

You miss some games after 1M-1NT, but sometimes these games aren't making and sometimes you play 1NT instead of 2NT going down.

This seems to be my key issue. Do you mind helping with a few questions:
(1) If I understand correctly, your 1NT response is non-forcing?
(2) What is the range for you 1NT response? Would you respond 1NT with 5HCP ever? What is the maximum for the 1NT response?
(3) Is a 2NT response natural? (Or Jacoby? Or?)
(4) How many points would you need to raise a 1NT response to 2NT?
(5) Do you open a major or a minor with two four-card suits? Under what circumstances (if at all) do you open a prepared minor?
(6) Do you make other allowances for a wide-range 1NT response? e.g. Do you sit 1NT with 5422/6322/4441 shapes or do tend to rebid to allow for partner holding a stronger response?

[Kungsgeten]

 Tramticket, on 2018-September-24, 09:18, said:

Hi Kungsgeten, I am interested in this reply:



I fully agree that the auctions that start with a 2-over-1 must be easier to handle if the bid is forcing to game - you can bid naturally and not worry that the bidding can be dropped.



This seems to be my key issue. Do you mind helping with a few questions:
(1) If I understand correctly, your 1NT response is non-forcing?
(2) What is the range for you 1NT response? Would you respond 1NT with 5HCP ever? What is the maximum for the 1NT response?
(3) Is a 2NT response natural? (Or Jacoby? Or?)
(4) How many points would you need to raise a 1NT response to 2NT?
(5) Do you open a major or a minor with two four-card suits? Under what circumstances (if at all) do you open a prepared minor?
(6) Do you make other allowances for a wide-range 1NT response? e.g. Do you sit 1NT with 5422/6322/4441 shapes or do tend to rebid to allow for partner holding a stronger response?

I made an error in my previous post: I meant that I can't see how a WEAK NT and 2/1 forcing for one round would solve the problems.

1. Yes, our 1NT response is non-forcing. We play a 15-17 NT opener, which may include a five card major. Opener passes the 1NT response if having 12-14 balanced. Some players choose to rebid a three card minor again if having a five card major, but I tend not to do so.
2. I think this is partnership style. I sometimes respond on less than 6 hcp if I think that it will improve the contract. I'd say that expected range is something like 6-11 but we might have 4-12?
3. We use the 2NT response as "Jacoby" (but its called "Stenbergs" in Sweden). We play it as game-forcing with 4+ support.
4. 1M-1NT; 2NT shows 18-19.
5. This also depends on partnership style. Some prefer opening "bottom-up", but if that's the case I think you might as well play 1S opening as 5+ cards and play 1C as 3+. Some always open the major (hearts if 4-4). The style I'm used to is called "Modern Standard" in Sweden. With four card suit(s) you open in this order: hearts, clubs, spades, diamonds. Some play that 4441 hands always open their lowest suit.
6. I tend to almost always make a rebid with an unbalanced hand (when playing four card majors this is often important since you haven't shown your fifth major suit card yet). If I hold 4441 and a hand that doesn't want to pass 1M-1NT, I usually open a minor instead.

[Tramticket]

 Kungsgeten, on 2018-September-24, 10:00, said:

I made an error in my previous post: I meant that I can't see how a WEAK NT and 2/1 forcing for one round would solve the problems.

1. Yes, our 1NT response is non-forcing. We play a 15-17 NT opener, which may include a five card major. Opener passes the 1NT response if having 12-14 balanced. Some players choose to rebid a three card minor again if having a five card major, but I tend not to do so.
2. I think this is partnership style. I sometimes respond on less than 6 hcp if I think that it will improve the contract. I'd say that expected range is something like 6-11 but we might have 4-12?
3. We use the 2NT response as "Jacoby" (but its called "Stenbergs" in Sweden). We play it as game-forcing with 4+ support.
4. 1M-1NT; 2NT shows 18-19.
5. This also depends on partnership style. Some prefer opening "bottom-up", but if that's the case I think you might as well play 1S opening as 5+ cards and play 1C as 3+. Some always open the major (hearts if 4-4). The style I'm used to is called "Modern Standard" in Sweden. With four card suit(s) you open in this order: hearts, clubs, spades, diamonds. Some play that 4441 hands always open their lowest suit.
6. I tend to almost always make a rebid with an unbalanced hand (when playing four card majors this is often important since you haven't shown your fifth major suit card yet). If I hold 4441 and a hand that doesn't want to pass 1M-1NT, I usually open a minor instead.

Thanks, this is interesting. I can see that you will sometimes risk missing game when you are at the maximum end of the 1NT response, I guess that this is a trade off against the easy of bidding after the 2-over-1 response.

[helene_t]

No, it is not possible to play weak notrump, 4cM and 2/1 game forcing, unless you play limited openings (strong club system).

The problem is that when opener has a balanced 15-count with four spades, and responder has a balanced 6-8 points with a doubleton in opener's suit, it must go
1♠-1NT
pass

Hence, responder must bid at the 2-level with 10 points (and probably also many 9-counts as opener should also pass the 1NT response with 16 points).

You could presumably agree that responder makes a jump shift with 10-11 points, but not all hands are suitable for jump shifts. If a 2NT response is 10-11 balanced, what to do with both minors?

If you want to play 4-card majors and 2/1 GF, you have two options:
- play a strong club system, or
- play a 14-16 1NT opening

[msjennifer]

 helene_t, on 2018-September-24, 17:06, said:

No, it is not possible to play weak notrump and 2/1 game forcing, unless you play limited openings (strong club system).

The problem is that when opener has a balanced 15-count with four spades, and responder has a balanced 6-8 points with a doubleton in opener's suit, it must go
1♠-1NT
pass

Hence, responder must bid at the 2-level with 10 points (and probably also many 9-counts as opener should also pass the 1NT response with 16 points).

You could presumably agree that responder makes a jump shift with 10-11 points, but not all hands are suitable for jump shifts. If a 2NT response is 10-11 balanced, what to do with both minors?

If you want to play 4-card majors and 2/1 GF, you have two options:
- play a strong club system, or
- play a 14-16 1NT opening

With due respect to HELENE T,I am sorry but I have not come across any strong club system that allows a 4 card Major suit opening that is commonly played today.I am told by my colleague in India that some Bombay players played such-a system known as Bombay Club.Perhaps and perhaps only ,as I don't know,Roman Club might be the one.

[Kungsgeten]

I have never really understood the theory behind Acol with weak NT and four card majors. Sure, I understand that it is a natural system and therefore it makes sense -- I just don't understand the merits. The best thing about it must be the minor suit openings, which shows a real suit and always extra playing strength. The same could be said about the majors, but the downside is that it is harder to tell about your length.

The main benefit (to me) fit four card majors is the preemptive effect of the 1M opening. The opening itself might hinder a lower overcall (or you might open their five card suit). It could also be the case that partner raises and fourth hand is in a tougher spot compared to five card majors. I think a lot of these problems for the opponents disappear if playing a weak NT. Now if opener only has four, he'll have a strong NT. Now the opponents probably don't want to enter the auction anyways. You preempt yourself instead.

So with four card majors I'd recommend not opening 1M with a strong NT. I think weak NT fits better with five card majors. The other four card major style is canapé, where you open 1M with 4M and longer side-suit, or 6+M (and maybe some balanced hands).

[helene_t]

Yeah, Blue and Roman Club are examples, and in Germany 4-card major strong club systems are quite popular. I don't think any of those systems are commonly played as 2/1 GF. Just saying that it would be playable. The crucial thing is that the major suit openings must deny a balanced 15-16 count with only four cards in the opening suit.

[Tramticket]

 Kungsgeten, on 2018-September-25, 00:44, said:

The main benefit (to me) fit four card majors is the preemptive effect of the 1M opening. The opening itself might hinder a lower overcall (or you might open their five card suit). It could also be the case that partner raises and fourth hand is in a tougher spot compared to five card majors.

I agree that the 1M opening has a pre-emptive effect and this is a major advantage of the system (this is also why I favour the style of Acol where you open a major before a minor with two four-card suits).

But consider also that the 12-14 1NT opening also has pre-emptive effect (and occurs more frequently than a strong no-trump). This combination of four-card majors and a weak no-trump means that you are often making it difficult for opponents to have an easy entry into the auction. We open 1m with much less frequency, but when we do and the opponents interfere it is possible for partner to compete, knowing that we hold a real suit.

I'm not saying that the system is perfect, but it has some real merits.

[Kungsgeten]

Just saying that the preemptive effect of 1M is a bit lost if its always a strong hand when just being four. Opening a four card 1M when playing strong 1NT is almost as preemptive as opening a weak NT. The "downside" is then when you open 1m with a weak NT and no major (where a weak NT probably would have been better).

Many who play four card majors in a natural system don't like artificial methods, but the following structure might be something to consider:

1C = Natural or any 15-17 NT (even with 5M).
1D = Natural, 18-19 if balanced.
1M = Four card majors, 12-14 or 18-19 if balanced.
1NT = 12-14, no major.

Now you have a pretty aggressive system where 2/1 as GF would be ok. You also lose one of the flaws of a weak NT: not finding a 4-4 major fit. You could probably play 1NT as more wide-ranging too if you like, since it denies a major and you could use 2C or 2D as some sort of range-ask.

[nekthen]

As an Acol player, I actually think that it helps you define your shape quicker than a 5 card Major system.
Take the sequence 1♥ 1[N] 2♥. An Acol player knows that 2♥ shows 6 cards, if 1N is forcing it could still be a weak NT hand with 5♥. Ilike the fact that in Acol your rebid tells partner more about your hand and how your hand is better than a 1N opening. I am assuming that you play the modern style of regarding 5332 hands as balanced
I also believe that opening 44 hands with the lowest ranked suit is superior in Acol, the preemptive value of a 4 card M is small and it is still easy to find your major fit. Having a Gazilli style 2C rebid available is useful in Acol and many other systems. It means that jump rebids are unequivocally GF, as all the strong but not good enough to commit to game hands are bid via a 2♣ rebid.

[gordontd]

 nekthen, on 2018-September-25, 03:25, said:

As an Acol player, I actually think that it helps you define your shape quicker than a 5 card Major system.
Take the sequence 1♥ 1[N] 2♥. An Acol player knows that 2♥ shows 6 cards, if 1N is forcing it could still be a weak NT hand with 5♥.

This is not true. When playing a forcing NT one rebids a three-card minor rather than a five-card major.

[kanchi]

When you play 4cardmajor generally it is a balanced hand so 2/1 is forcing to game and1nt invitational I adopt this line

[The_Badger]

 Draculea, on 2018-September-24, 04:10, said:

does anyone have experience playing acol (4 card major, weak nt) with 2/1 responses being game forcing?
would a system like that qualify as acol?

Having read a few replies, I think it is possible if 1♣, possibly 1♦ is played as 'prepared'. Thus hands that are 15-17 balanced (with a four card major) would have to be opened 1♣/1♦. Which sorts of defeats the object somewhat. But with all these bidding variations, there are swings and roundabouts.

Without analysing it in great detail, using such a system would mean that many major suit openings would be automatically five cards, and would have either an unbalanced shape, suitable for a two level rebid, or would have extra beans to 'counter' the nebulous 1NT response in 2/1.

All 4333/4432/5332 12-14 hands would be opened 1NT, and strong/weak 4441 hands would be handled by opening the minor much in the same way as 2/1.

Personally, I would have to analyse this a bit further, but playing a 2/1 Acol system with a weak NT is, in my view, feasible. It sort of pans out as a amalgam of Kaplan-Sheinwold, Acol and 2/1. Any takers?

[nekthen]

 gordontd, on 2018-September-25, 03:42, said:

This is not true. When playing a forcing NT one rebids a three-card minor rather than a five-card major.

To my mind that is an even more horrible compromise!

Still if bidding were easy, it would be a much duller game.

[helene_t]

 nekthen, on 2018-September-25, 05:05, said:

To my mind that is an even more horrible compromise!

Not at all.

The 5-card hearts is already known so no reason to repeat that. Responder will usually take preference with doubleton support.

Showing the 3-card minor sometimes leads to a better contract. If short in hearts, responder can pass or raise with 5+ cards (sometimes with 4). And in the auction
1♠-1NT
2♣-?
responder can now show a long red suit.

[pescetom]

 gordontd, on 2018-September-25, 03:42, said:

This is not true. When playing a forcing NT one rebids a three-card minor rather than a five-card major.

That's certainly the way we play forcing 1NT, a rebid of opener's major is unequivocably 6+card.
Although our forcing is really semi-forcing and with a bare minimum 5332 opener can now pass.