[Wackojack]

My understanding of Acol is that 1♠-2♦-2♥ is non forcing, but in practice very rarely passed. The 2♦ response shows 9+ points, but crucially because a 1NT response is 6-9 points, the 2 over 1 response shows a decent 5 card suit if only 9 points. Thus many Acol players play 1♠-2♦-2NT as forcing showing at least 15 opposite a good 9. The sequence in question 1♠-2♦-2♥-2♠ is showing 9-10 points with more likely 2 spades than 3 spades. With a good 16 you want to be in game so bid 3♣. Partner has the option to bid spades again with 3 but 3NT is going to be the most likely spot as she is likely to have a good stops in clubs.

The issue of raising 1♠ to 2♠ on a 3 card suit: I don't think it matters if you play up-the-line bidding of 4 card suits or not. Most of the time it is best to raise with 3. Occasionally with 3444 you might try a 1NT response. The vulnerability and your strength come into it. 1♠-2♠ say with 5 or 6 points is very pre-emptive and puts pressure on the opps. Perhaps the weaker declarer players might be a bit more wary.

[Wackojack]

[quote name='helene_t' date='Jan 9 2008, 07:14 AM'][QUOTE
3[sp] by opener would not be forcing. In the post-mortem I agreed with p that I should have bid 3[di] which would have been forcing, but this poll is strongly in favor of 3[cl], which makes sense. 3[cl] as fsf is probably more useful than 3[cl] as 5404.

[/quote]
I think 3[di] should be non forcing and natural. This would show a minimum opener 5431 and just looking for the best spot. I would expect partner to pass with with a poor doubleton spade.

[helene_t]

In Cumbria they all played 1♠-2♦-2♥ as NF, here everybody seems to play it as forcing. Such a big cultural difference only 20 minutes away But at Cumbria I was with a tourist group, maybe the locals play it as forcing.

Wackojack said:

I think 3♦ should be non forcing and natural. This would show a minimum opener 5431 and just looking for the best spot.

It should at least be invitational, IMHO. Without game interest, I would pass 2♠.

Btw, normally the fourth suit by opener is patterning out, not fsf. Why do everybody vote for 3♣ here, anyway? Is it an Acol thing? Or is it bridge logic that if we need a forcing bid but no bid in an already mentioned suit is forcing, then the fourth suit becomes fsf?

[Walddk]

helene_t, on Jan 9 2008, 02:33 PM, said:

Btw, normally the fourth suit by opener is patterning out, not fsf. Why do everybody vote for 3♣ here, anyway? Is it an Acol thing? Or is it bridge logic that if we need a forcing bid but no bid in an already mentioned suit is forcing, then the fourth suit becomes fsf?

It's not an Acol thing. Although it is often the case, 4th suit is not necessarily the 4th call of the auction (responder's rebid). 4th suit is also used by opener, and sometimes later by responder. Examples:

1♣ - 1♥
1♠ - 2♥
3♦


1♥ - 1NT
2♠ - 3♣
3♦

And your hand:

1♠ - 2♦
2♥ - 2♠
3♣

If opener is strong enough to bid again over 2♠, 3♣ is best used as a catch-all 4th suit. Patterning out with 5404 isn't important because only in theory can responder have four clubs. Even if he has, it is unlikely that we are going to play there. So with that shape opener would normally bid a number of notrumps.

...

Responder can also introduce 4th suit at a later stage in the auction. Examples:

1♣ - 1♠
2♣ - 2♥
3♣ - 3♦


1♥ - 1♠
1N - 2♦
2♠ - 3♣


1♣ - 1♦
1♥ - 3♣
3♦ - 3♠

Roland

[P_Marlowe]

helene_t, on Jan 9 2008, 07:33 AM, said:

<snip
Btw, normally the fourth suit by opener is patterning out, not fsf. Why do everybody vote for 3♣ here, anyway? Is it an Acol thing? Or is it bridge logic that if we need a forcing bid but no bid in an already mentioned suit is forcing, then the fourth suit becomes fsf?

It is, of course it may depend, how
you define FSF, for me:
FSF = we have bid 3 suits naturally,
bidding the 4th suit is artificial.

This means FSF is also on beside the
standard squence, when responder
uses FSF as his 2nd bid.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

Hmmm ... if it goes
1♦-1♥
1♠-1NT
2♣*
the fourth suit is natural. Roland's second example
1♥-1NT
2♠-3♣
3♦*
makes sense to play as artificial, although it wouldn't have occurred to me at first sight. I wonder if I will always be able to decide

[nick_s]

I would play both 3♣ and s♦ as game forcing. 3♦ would imply nothing in clubs - probably a stiff, and at least Hx in diamonds.
I would bid 3♣ because I want partner to bid 3NT with Hxx in clubs and an otherwise suitable hand. If I bid 3♦, I would only expect partner to bid 3NT if he thought there was a decent chance of making the contract opposite a stiff club.

[Walddk]

helene_t, on Jan 9 2008, 05:34 PM, said:

Hmmm ... if it goes
1♦-1♥
1♠-1NT
2♣*
the fourth suit is natural.

I am not so sure that 2♣ is natural on that auction. Say I have this hand:

KQxx
AJx
AQJxx
x

Then I would like 2♣ to be 4th suit to see if responder has five hearts. Can't I just bid 2♥ you may ask? That would not show extras in my methods, and I can't jump to 3♥ without committing to game. I might bid 2♥ on

Kxxx
Axx
KQxxx
x

No guarantee of a 5-3 fit, I know, but that doesn't bother me. 1NT may play better if responder has longer clubs than hearts, perhaps also if he is 4-4, but a 4-3 fit at the 2-level usually plays quite well. The hand is also suit-oriented with an ace and two kings.

However, if I have slow values, I will likely pass 1NT.

KJxx
QJx
AJ10xx
J

So as a general rule the 4th suit is fsf if we have bid three suits naturally. That's the best agreement in my opinion, and it also makes it easier to remember.

Roland

[bhall]

40+ years ago I played a very similar style, but the 2♦ bid promised both 9+ HCP and 11+ total points. The sequence as given

1♠-2♦
2♥

was forcing one round, but the 2♠ rebid by responder showed a "defective" limit raise, such as xxx or honor-x. With worse, responder would underbid with 1N. It certaily denied the values for an invitational 2N rebid. A hand such as 10x Qxx AKJxx xxx would (barely) qualify.

If that were the style, I would simply bid 4♠ over 2♠.

While 3♣ would have been forcing, it would imply either a high card or length there, and thus entail some risk of landing in the wrong spot.

[jtfanclub]

Quote

I assume responder has shown 9-11 with a doubleton spade and no club stopper.

I don't think there's anything about a club stopper in there. IMHO, 1♠-2♦-2♥-2NT shouldn't be done with a 9 count.

3♣ seems obvious.

Quote

It still amazes me that you must respond 2-o-1 on a 9 count. 2NT rebid (15-17) by opener is GF you say. I think that is mainstream in Acol-land, but it doesn't make sense that the partnersip is committed to game with 15 opposite a possible 9.

But it's not 'a possible 9'. It's 'a possible 9 that would force game across a 15-17 1NT opener'. The 9 counts that would not force game across a 15-17 1NT opener respond 1NT. In fact, I'd argue that the bids aren't based on responder's HCP at all.

Want to be in game across a balanced 15 count? Bid a new suit at the 2 level.
Want to be in game across a balanced 18 count but not a 15 count? Bid 1NT.
Don't want to be in game across a balanced 18 count? Pass.

It's a great concept.

Quote

The system is seriously flawed.

Assume for the moment that the auction would go:

1♠-1NT-2♥-2♠ in 2/1

Do you feel that you're better positioned for your third bid than your would be in ACOL?

This part of ACOL is far superior to 2/1, IMHO.

[EricK]

I think you should just bid 2NT on the third round. This must show extras - with a minimum hand you would pass 2♠ - and it gives partner an opportunity to show 3 card ♠ length or extra length in ♦. It is true you don't have a ♣ stop, but if partner does not have 3♠ or 4♥ or 6♦ then he has at least 3♣ himself and might very well have enough to give you a full stop.

If partner passes 2NT then the chances are that 3NT is a very touch and go contract, with opps setting up enough ♣ tricks before you can set up your nine.

[NickToll]

According to David Bird and Tim Bourke ("Tournament Acol"), both 2♠ and 3♠ rebids are non forcing: 2♠ shows a minimum 2-over-1 and usually a doubleton spade, whereas 3♠ is invitational with a reasonable three- or even four-card fit. To force in spades, one needs to bid 3♣ FSF, then support spades. This fits well with the traditional ACOL style, that encourages limit bids.

Accepting the sensible agreement that 2♦ guarantees game facing a strong notrump, 3♣ by opener seems acceptable: good hand, suggesting 3NT if partner has a club stop.

[Cascade]

helene_t, on Jan 9 2008, 10:57 PM, said:

Opps are silent. Matchpoints, intermediate opps, heterogenous field.

1♠-2♦
2♥-2♠
?

1♠ promised 4+, rules of 20. Major 4-card usually precedes minor.
2♦ is 9+. A natural NF 2N was available. Not sure how often this p would be 2♠ on a 3-card, club style varies with respect to this and I don't know him that well.

2♥ forcing for one round. 2N would have been 15-17 GF.

Responder has shown invitational values with a spade preference (2 or 3 spades for me - 3♠ would have shown three spades and been forcing).

There is a case for any advance to be forcing.

I'd bid 3♣ to show extra values and express doubt about the final denomination - 4th suit forcing.

[Cascade]

NickToll, on Jan 10 2008, 09:08 AM, said:

According to David Bird and Tim Bourke ("Tournament Acol"), both 2♠ and 3♠ rebids are non forcing: 2♠ shows a minimum 2-over-1 and usually a doubleton spade, whereas 3♠ is invitational with a reasonable three- or even four-card fit. To force in spades, one needs to bid 3♣ FSF, then support spades. This fits well with the traditional ACOL style, that encourages limit bids.

This seems inefficient to me - we use two bids for the narrow (9)10-11(12) range and have no bid to immediately set trumps and start a slam investigation.

1♠ 2♦
2♥ 3♣
3NT 4♠ ...

we have already lost a round of bidding and it could easily be worse if we think our hand is too good to bid just 4♠.

1♠ 2♦
2♥ 2♠ - I am only invitational

1♠ 2♦
2♥ 3♠ - I have enough for game/slam. Over this we play serious and fivolous slam tries.

seems much simpler and more efficient.

We play 2♥ is forcing and wide-ranging and as a consequence we almost never bid ...

1♠ 2♦
2♥ 4♠

For us this would be a sort of picture bid showing minimum game values with decent diamonds and maybe a spade card and no side control - ace, king, singleton or void.

[mike777]

helene_t, on Jan 9 2008, 04:57 AM, said:

AQJ9x
AKJx
xx
Jx

Opps are silent. Matchpoints, intermediate opps, heterogenous field.

1♠-2♦
2♥-2♠
?

1♠ promised 4+, rules of 20. Major 4-card usually precedes minor.
2♦ is 9+. A natural NF 2N was available. Not sure how often this p would be 2♠ on a 3-card, club style varies with respect to this and I don't know him that well.

2♥ forcing for one round. 2N would have been 15-17 GF.

Edit: Sorry, for the 3♦ answer I should have distinguished between a forcing and a non-forcing 3♦

what hand does this typically show in acol?...I assume there is some standard, often hand?

I assume 3c is pretty standard here?

[Zelandakh]

I would bid 3♣ too.

My own preference for this type of auction in acol is for 2/1 responses to be 10+ and forcing to 2NT. 1♠ - 2m - 3♥ shows a GF hand with at least 5-5 majors. Also, any suit rebid by opener after a 1M opening promises a 5 card suit. On responder's rebid, I like simple preference to be 2-3 card support and a minimum, with a jump raise being GF with 3-card support.

So the auction 1♠ - 2♦ - 2♥ - 2♠ - 3♣ shows precisely 5-4 majors (or very rarely could start a ♠ slam try with 6+) and asks responder to pick their game.

(-: Zel :-)

[lexlogan]

I'm curious about what opener has shown after 1♠-2♦-2♥. Does this promise 5+-4+ ? How would opener bid with 4-4 and 15-17 ? Rebid 2NT and depend upon responder to show hearts if he's got them? Or rebid 2♥ and plan to suggest notrump later if partner goes back to spades?

[Cascade]

lexlogan, on Jan 12 2008, 10:01 AM, said:

I'm curious about what opener has shown after 1♠-2♦-2♥. Does this promise 5+-4+ ? How would opener bid with 4-4 and 15-17 ? Rebid 2NT and depend upon responder to show hearts if he's got them? Or rebid 2♥ and plan to suggest notrump later if partner goes back to spades?

With 4=4=3=2 or 4=4=2=3 and 15-17 hcp most modern Acol (weak NT; 4-card Major) players would open 1♥ and rebid 2NT after a two over one response.

[Echognome]

lexlogan, on Jan 11 2008, 01:01 PM, said:

I'm curious about what opener has shown after 1♠-2♦-2♥. Does this promise 5+-4+ ? How would opener bid with 4-4 and 15-17 ? Rebid 2NT and depend upon responder to show hearts if he's got them? Or rebid 2♥ and plan to suggest notrump later if partner goes back to spades?

4-4 majors opens 1♥ instead of 1♠ if out of NT range.

[lexlogan]

Cascade, on Jan 11 2008, 09:03 PM, said:

lexlogan, on Jan 12 2008, 10:01 AM, said:

I'm curious about what opener has shown after 1♠-2♦-2♥. Does this promise 5+-4+ ? How would opener bid with 4-4 and 15-17 ? Rebid 2NT and depend upon responder to show hearts if he's got them? Or rebid 2♥ and plan to suggest notrump later if partner goes back to spades?

With 4=4=3=2 or 4=4=2=3 and 15-17 hcp most modern Acol (weak NT; 4-card Major) players would open 1♥ and rebid 2NT after a two over one response.

OK, good, I've always thought 1♥ was more logical than 1♠ with 4-4; now how do you respond over 1♥ with 4 spades, 5+ diamonds and sufficient strength for a 2♦ bid? 1♠ unless strong enough to force to game? Or 2♦, planning to rebid 2♠ but willing to rebid 3♠ over 2NT since opener has promised a game force?