[Bbradley62]

SAYC doesn't specify Lebensohl, so what is expected in an individual game (playing SAYC) after interference in our NT auction?

Over 1NT-(Dbl), are systems on or are 2-level bids runouts?

If it goes 1NT-(2♣)-2♦, is that a transfer?

[MikeRJ]

In SAYC systems on after X, off after overcall.

See ACBL booklet http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/...gle%20pages.pdf.

Mike

[P_Marlowe]

Bbradley62, on Mar 9 2010, 12:25 PM, said:

SAYC doesn't specify Lebensohl, so what is expected in an individual game (playing SAYC) after interference in our NT auction?

Over 1NT-(Dbl), are systems on or are 2-level bids runouts?

If it goes 1NT-(2♣)-2♦, is that a transfer?

If they make a X => System is on.
If they intervene with a suit bid => system is off, assume
penalty double, new suit on the 2 level are to play, new
suits on the 3 level are gf.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[TylerE]

In reality, you're much more likely to get it right if you assume:

Systems on always (even at the 3 level)
X is stolen bid.

[Free]

TylerE, on Mar 10 2010, 03:39 PM, said:

In reality, you're much more likely to get it right if you assume:

Systems on always (even at the 3 level)
X is stolen bid.

No you're not. From the moment they overcall 2♦ or higher you lost your precious stayman.

[mycroft]

Free, opposite someone playing SAYC, you are very much correct.
Opposite someone playing on BBO agreeing "SAYC", Tyler is correct - if you assume systems on/stolen bid, you're likely to be right. If you're lucky, you'll get "systems on/stolen bid double/cuebid stayman"; if you're not, your cuebid is going to be passed.

Remember: online, someone playing SAYC means simply that they can find the letters "S", "A", "Y", and "C" on their keyboard.... (yes, I stole that quote).

[kenberg]

When I am playing in an individual, say the acbl indy which specifies sayc, I assume that partner is bidding sayc. Of course sometimes he isn't. I live with that. I find such a disater to be far preferable to having to explain after the disaster: Partner, I know the site stipulates sayc as a default and I saw that your profile says sayc but I decided to assume that you were playing stolen because... (it doesn't matter what reason you give, he won't be reading it).

[helene_t]

Agree with Ken.

I suppose many would play stolen bid over 2♣ as that is what GIB plays. And many would assume Capp for the same reason. But over 2♦ and higher I think the vast majority would assume natural.

[pirate22]

Good points raised---with a regular pard on BBO we have agreed sys on,but with a pick up pard-I usually state sys off if opps come in.I find no confusion then
regards

[peachy]

In an ACBL indy, you are expected to know what SAYC is and if you are not bidding by SAYC, there could be score adjustments. In non-ACBL indy, see what mycroft wrote, also no redress for any damage to bidder or their opponents.

[hrothgar]

TylerE, on Mar 10 2010, 05:39 PM, said:

In reality, you're much more likely to get it right if you assume:

Systems on always (even at the 3 level)
X is stolen bid.

Said it before, I'll say it again...

The most terrifying words in bridge are "You play stolen bid doubles, don't you dearie?"