[shevek]

Paul Martson and I are writing an intermediate Acol text, mainly for NZ. At the moment we are just adapting our Standard book and switching numbers but wonder if we should do more.

♠T6   ♥A765   ♦KQ93   ♣AQ3   

I would open 1♦ but would open 1♥ if you swap the red suit. I like partner to raise on three and don't fancy ♥Axxx opposite Jxx.
If you give me a 17-count say, then 1♥ is okay on a thin suit because I plan 2NT over a raise.

What is your policy?

[gnasher]

Playing a weak notrump, I prefer to play that opener uses his judgement as to which suit to open, and I would adopt a similar strategy to yours. Some partnerships always open the major, and some always open the minor. If I were writing the book, I'd mention all three approaches.

Opening the minor makes it easier to find minor-suit slams; opening the major sidesteps the question of what to rebid with 4x4x after 1D-1H.

[david_c]

1♥ unless the suit is terrible. I would open 1♥ with the example hand.

I bid this way with unfamiliar partners because I feel it simplifies the auction. With a regular partner it might be better to do something different, but since I would never play Acol with a regular partner the situation doesn't arise.

[hotShot]

Bidding up-the-line has the big advantage, that the suit length is clear.
♥ followed by ♦ promises 5-4. The problem that ♦ followed by ♥
is reverse, is easier to solve playing weak NT, because you can open 1NT with the weak hands.

Judgment and major-first have advantages, but you leave your partner guessing about the suit length is it 4-4, 5-4 or 4-5.

One weakness of 4cM Acol is that in competitive auctions like:
1M - 2m - ?
You would really want to know, whether partner has 4 or 5 cards in his major suit. Playing weak NT, 1M is more likely to be 5 cards, bidding up-the-line also adds a little bit to the probability that it shows 5 cards.

[P_Marlowe]

1D.

I wrote somewhere else, that I dont like to excersse judgment
with my first call, so ...
I would go with always, 1D or 1H.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

hotShot, on Dec 28 2008, 12:41 PM, said:

Bidding up-the-line has the big advantage, that the suit length is clear.
♥ followed by ♦ promises 5-4.

You have to rebid 2NT over p's 2♣ anyway so it doesn't matter. Too bad you don't have a spade stopper - balanced is balanced. The only alternative I can envision is 3♣ over p's 2♣ but I wouldn't recommend that, at least not to beginners.

If you always open 1♥ with this shape, then 2NT over 1♦-2♣ denies a fourcard major so p doesn't have to check for it.

Should beginners be taught simple rules or judgment? I think most would find rules easier and some would find judgment more interesting. If the rules are arbitrary and likely to change in different directions, judgment is more useful. In any case, the choice of Acol probably implies that opener is allowed to exercise judgment.

If you want a simple rule, then it must be majors before minors. That's the whole point of playing 4-card majors - if you want to bid up-the-line, you probably would rather play 5-card majors. It might make sense to open 5332 differently than 4333 since the former is more likely to play in spades. It might make sense to open 4333 differently than 3334 for the same reason. It can hardly make sense to open 4333 differently than 4324, though.

Unfortunately, there is no simple rule that covers the 4441-hands as well unless you allow for a 1NT opening with a singleton minor.

[hotShot]

helene_t, on Dec 28 2008, 04:42 PM, said:

hotShot, on Dec 28 2008, 12:41 PM, said:

Bidding up-the-line has the big advantage, that the suit length is clear.
♥ followed by ♦ promises 5-4.

You have to rebid 2NT over p's 2♣ anyway so it doesn't matter. Too bad you don't have a spade stopper - balanced is balanced. The only alternative I can envision is 3♣ over p's 2♣ but I wouldn't recommend that, at least not to beginners.

If you always open 1♥ with this shape, then 2NT over 1♦-2♣ denies a fourcard major so p doesn't have to check for it.

Partner could answer our 1♦ opening with 1♥, 1♠ and 1NT.
If he chooses to answer 2♣ he hasn't got a 4 cM or he has extra strength and 5+ ♣. So we don't need to offer a 4cM, as partner denied one already and if he happens to have 5+♣ and 4♥, he'll have to introduce them on our way to 3NT.

[foo]

shevek, on Dec 27 2008, 09:37 PM, said:

Paul Martson and I are writing an intermediate Acol text, mainly for NZ. At the moment we are just adapting our Standard book and switching numbers but wonder if we should do more.

♠T6   ♥A765   ♦KQ93   ♣AQ3   

I would open 1♦ but would open 1♥ if you swap the red suit. I like partner to raise on three and don't fancy ♥Axxx opposite Jxx.
If you give me a 17-count say, then 1♥ is okay on a thin suit because I plan 2NT over a raise.

What is your policy?

Assuming you are playing WNT's, there is every reason to keep the bidding as low as naturally possible with 15+ flat.

1D-1H;2H => says "4 ♥'s, 15-17 Dummy Points". Very accurate.

1D-1S;1N => again, very accurate.

1D-1N => Right. O knows to pass now and not fall in love with their SNT.

1D-2C => Responder has extras and O is looking at a SNT? O knows We almost certainly belong in Game.

1D-2D => Again, very accurate regardless of whether you are playing Inverted Minors or not. If you are playing WNT's, you should be playing Inverted Minors.

When I've played WNT+4cM's, the style that seemed to work best for opening 1H vs 1m when 44 in H+m was
=when everything in the hand is concentrated in the two 44 suits, making your hand a problem at NT.
=when I had a small doubleton or Ax (therefore a decent ruffing value) and the 4 card ♥ suit was very chunky.

If playing a SNT, I tend to very much open 1N with a SNT unless the sort of exceptions I just listed are present.