[junyi_zhu]

1eyedjack, on Feb 18 2010, 03:02 PM, said:

My kids are showing an interest in learning how to play, and I am agonising over which would be the simplest bidding methods on which to start them off. And yes I know that bidding methods are not the only or even most important aspect, but that is the subject of this post. Basic principles of play technique are universal.

It seems to be really down to a choice of 2: Weak 1N opener and 4 card majors ("standard english"), or Strong 1N and 5 card majors ("standard rest of the world").

Had we lived in the rest of the world it would be a no-brainer. Go with "standard rest of the world". That may yet be the right choice. However we live in England.

Please note that which is the more effective method at winning is not even on the radar as regards a factor in the decision. It is all about ease of learning. For the same reason, teaching both methods would only confuse at this stage and is completely out of the question.

In favour of the English method
(1) If they ever get to play in F2F games in England they (and their partners) will be better prepared.
(2) There is quite a lot of quite good literature published by the EBU and its teaching arm.

In favour of the rest-of-the-world method
(1) They will probably play mostly on BBO. Yes there are clubs within BBO that concentrate on the English method, but it would definitely be more flexible to play the rest-of-world standard when playing on BBO.
(2) They will be better placed to progress eventually to playing a 2/1 system without having to unlearn too much of the methods on which they were weaned. That said, if they get to the point of learning alternative systems I would probably suggest that they learn whichever of the above two standards I did not start them off on, as a higher priority than moving over to 2/1.

Neutral to either method, in my current view - and I am open to persuasion, as this is the single-most important factor - is how hard it is for a beginner to pick up the method being taught.

Any views?

In a family game we may be playing the odd game in rubber format. That may make a difference

The easiest system is probably acol with Strong NT IMHO. Starting from a 4 card major system may help them a lot in their future learning process. Also, I don't want to say 4 card major systems are not as effective as 5 card major systems. The key problem is that few top level theorists study 4 card major systems.

[rbforster]

EHAA?

[helene_t]

Not sure about your kids but in general I think Acol is a good system for beginners.

Maybe 5-card majors with limit bids and a strong notrump is easier than Acol (at least I would find that easier to teach), but fact is that 5-card major systems in general use are very confusing in terms of which bids are forcing. 2/1 is simple in that everything is forcing after a 2/1 response and "nothing" is forcing after a 1NT response, but the problem is that it is off in competition (and some would even say off by a passed hand, ugh) so they would have to learn limit bidding anyway. Besides, while it is possible that 2/1 is still a good system for beginners, there are no beginner's books on 2/1. So 2/1 unavoidably comes packed with all kind of fancy gadgets.

I disagree with the notion that it is simple to determine the forcing bid in Acol. There are loads of basic sequences the forcing character of which club players don't know, or disagree about. But the great advantage of Acol is that when it goes
1♥-(2♣)-2♦
and similar, i.e. a freebid under the 2-level of the opening suit, we are in the same system as if there had been no interference. This means that people who have learned constructive bidding in Acol will automatically handle a lot of contested auctions (not all, but a lot) correctly.

You can even play "Acol" as response structure to an overcall at the 1-level. Nobody plays SAYC-like, let alone 2/1-like, follow-ups after overcalls.

I used to think that a strong club system would be ideal for beginners. Having some experience, now, with teaching it to beginners, I am less sure. Anyway, I think availability of a teacher who understands the system well and also plays the system himself, and availability of partners and opps playing the system, and (if the students are going to rely a lot on books) good text books, are the most important factors.

If your kids are going to play mostly on BBO, I think 2/1 is what you should be aiming at, although it may not be the very first system they will learn. Thing is, SAYC and Acol, especially Acol, are played at a very low level on BBO. It will do your kids little good to waste time playing with and against all those gozillas. Your kids are beginners now but in a couple of months they will have outgrown all the eternal beginners on BBO as well as the local club. It will be better for them to play with the juniors on BBO. And they don't play Acol.

[the hog]

wank, on Feb 18 2010, 10:12 PM, said:

better players in england stopped playing weak and 4 already. teach them strong and 5

I would have thought the Hacket twins would be regarded as amongst England's better players. They play intermediate and 4 with frequent canape. Hardly a system for beginners.

[wank]

so you're agreeing with me lol. i think strong and 4 is a fine system. weak and 4 is not. their 'intermediate' no-trump is 14-16 or 15-17 depending on position. personally i call that strong.

with regard to a weak and 4, if you're playing minor openings with 4-4 Mm, i think you're wasting your time, because partner usually has 5 to open 1M but you can't trust him for it in competition - much better to play 5cM then you know where you are.

on the other hand, opening the major with 4-4 your killer sequence is 1M - 2M when you've got a strong NT. can't really move but you can be cold for game.

i realise this isn't relevant to what you should be teaching juniors.


what is relevant though is that none of the better english juniors play weak and 4. these are the people one would expect the OP's children to be playing with online or otherwise, not grannies at the local bridge club.

[the hog]

I partly agree with you. Personally I think weak and 5 is pretty decent as well.

[Old York]

One of the advantages of a 12-14hcp notrump, which is frequently overlooked, is the effect it has on suit openings. All suit opening show a 4+ card suit and a hand which is either too strong, or too unbalanced, to open 1NT.

This makes all suit openings more reliable.

All students should be taught to consider their rebid before choosing an opening bid.

Four card openings are freely made in Hearts and the Minors, but better players tend to be reluctant to open 4 card Spade suits, so 3 card Spade raises are common and safe.

Acol is a very good "starter pack" because all gadgets fit well and can be added as the student progresses, and you can experiment with strong-nt and/or 5cM without straying from the basic structure of the system.

Quote:
"on the other hand, opening the major with 4-4 your killer sequence is 1M - 2M when you've got a strong NT. can't really move but you can be cold for game"

1♥-2♥-2NT(invitational and non-forcing) shows this hand type, np

Tony

[TimG]

I don't think you should worry too much about which system is easiest to learn. The difference in difficulty is probably minor. And, bridge is a complex game, if they are going to be turned off by a 5.8 degree of difficulty instead of a 5.4 degree of difficulty, they probably won't last long at the bridge table. Whatever system they learn is just a stepping stone into the world of bridge systems; a solid foundation can be laid with any of the choices you have offered. I think it is extremely rare for someone to learn one approach and then five years later not to have at least experimented with other approaches.

I think the important consideration should be what their likely partners will be playing. If they will be playing with each other and you, it doesn't really matter; if they are going to be playing with pickup partners on BBO or in the local duplicate, what is most common in those venues should be considered.

[Wackojack]

helene_t, on Feb 18 2010, 06:16 PM, said:

Not sure about your kids but in general I think Acol is a good system for beginners.

If your kids are going to play mostly on BBO, I think 2/1 is what you should be aiming at, although it may not be the very first system they will learn. Thing is, SAYC and Acol, especially Acol, are played at a very low level on BBO. It will do your kids little good to waste time playing with and against all those gozillas. Your kids are beginners now but in a couple of months they will have outgrown all the eternal beginners on BBO as well as the local club. It will be better for them to play with the juniors on BBO. And they don't play Acol.

I agree with this although put a bit harshly. "One-eye" of course already knows this. Also wrt forcing bids Acol BBO ers will always jump when in doubt. So we get jump reverses just in case, and jump rebids on little more than min again just in case.

Having said that Acol taught properly is a a decent system. I am sure whichever system "One-eye" decides on, he will teach it well.