[zasanya]

MickyB, on Feb 14 2008, 02:08 PM, said:

helene_t, on Feb 14 2008, 01:35 PM, said:

han, on Feb 14 2008, 03:14 AM, said:

OK, give me an example of a problem that the weak notrump solves.

After an inverted minor raise, if 2N is NF you would like to do something else with 14, but 3N should show 18-19 (or not?). Having only one range for balanced hands that open one of a suit makes those things easier. I know you and Arend solve this problem by playing 14-16, but that means you have to rebid 2N with 17.

Also when considering a negative double you don't have to worry about opener having a weak notrump.

Agree with these, too - inverted minors are oh-so-simple playing weak NT, and it prevents the holding of a minimum 33(43) after 1m (2suit) X.

At this rate, I might find myself switching to weak NT...oh, wait, all these problems are solved by Polish Club too

Yeah. I find polish ♣ better than most other systems excluding acol and precision ♣.

[zasanya]

A great advantage of acol imo is lead indication.When acol player opens 1 minor
and opponnts buy the contract with responder on lead he knows opener has 5 cards in the minor or extra values . It is a significant advantage imo as most dubious contracts are made or lost due to opening lead.(again imo).

[Wackojack]

Scoring: IMP

---

Kibbing an Acol pair playing in a team match against 2 stars playing a 5 card major system, this hand interested me. The bidding went:
- - p p
1♠ 2♣ p 2nt
p p p

Our stone age Acol pair stole the opening ♠ bid and prevented the star opps from finding the part score in ♠ their way. You may comment that south's bid of 2nt was reckless. Nevertheless, even 2♣ will go 1 off. At the other table West (not playing Acol) opened 1nt and NS found their ♠ partial when South overcalled 2♣ for the majors. 2nt duly went 2 off btw.

Just another advantage of Acol? You may say that west's opening bid of 1♠ could just as easily help NS to a makeable 3nt contract when an 8 card fit in 4♠ would go down. Had I reported that scenario instead, arguing the inferiority of Acol, no doubt the Acol bashers would have been nodding sagely.

FWIIW I prefer playing 2/1 to Acol, but I am acutely aware when I play f2f team games against Acol players that there are hands (maybe not many) where the Acol system gives better results.

[helene_t]

Agree with your concluding remark, Jack, but not sure if I would consider this hand a prime example. By all vuln it would be quite likely that 1♠ was passed out, which is one of the reasons why I don't always open 1♠ with this hand, although I know the system prescribes it.

[NickRW]

Interesting thread.

For what it is worth this is what I prefer.

1) For a regular partnership, bundle strong 4441s into the multi. This is the old treatment. It won't work for pick up partnerships as it seems that bundling a strong minor hand into the multi is more popular (less strain on the memory cells probably)

2) For other 15+ 4441, I usually pick the major, hearts with both and plan to rebid in NT if partner bids the shortage.

3) For those in the 12-14 range it's
4414 open 1C
4144 probably 1D, but I might pick 1C if the suit is weak to inhibit the lead in case we end up in NT.
1444 and 4441 with single A or K, open 1N
other 1444, prefer 1D as I like 1H-1S-2C to show 5 hearts
other 4441 1H.

4) Weak, borderline 4441s can always be passed. Reese wrote that 4441 is a defensive shape and I tend to agree - with a singleton in your hand someone else will probably open and you may get a good chance to speak up later - or conceal your holding as the case may be.

In answer to Han, the main advantage of the weak NT definitely is that these weak NT hands aren't opened anything else. Sounds silly, but it means that all 1 openings are either 15+ or unbal. In particular 1S is always 5+ cards or 15+ assuming you never open 4441 shape 1S when in the 12-14 zone. Also 1H is rarely not 5. So you get a lot of the benefit of 5 card majors without the downside.

In answer to the 1D-2C-2D thing - most ordinary folk are playing MP pairs in the UK - playing limit bids and pretty much everything not forcing is playable at that form of scoring as the odd missed slam is not a disaster - and the benefit is that you don't get other disasters when people disagree over whether a certain sequence is or is not forcing. For those that play teams or butler/cross imp scored pairs (actually not very common here), then this treatment obviously becomes harder to justify.

Nick