[NickRW]

el mister, on Jun 9 2010, 10:17 AM, said:

junyi_zhu, on Jun 8 2010, 05:23 PM, said:

Also, if one decides to always bid the 4-4 suits up the line, he just misses the best part of 4 card major IMO.

So what is the score with opening 4-4 hands? Textbook Acol says to open the lower suit, whereas my partner argues we should always open a major over a minor when holding 4 of each (and ♥ before ♠) I do see the point of getting the major in early doors - is there consensus here?

It depends on what text books you read and who you talk to and what area of the country you live in.

So called "modern" Acol as recommended on the EBU site, amongst others, suggests opening 4/4 shapes in ♥, ♠, ♦, ♣ order (iirc) (and 4/4/4 shapes generally the suit below the singleton). This isn't, however, the Acol that Reese wrote about which had more complex rules - but would open minors more readily (however it wasn't completely opening up the line either). Then there are those who swear by opening almost utterly in up the line fashion.

Personally I don't see the point of opening 4cM if you're not going to prioritise the majors - but thats me - others would argue.

Nick

[awm]

It may be worth mentioning that there seem to be a couple styles of four-card major. In one style, you tend to open the cheaper of two four-card suits. This means 1♠ is almost always a five card suit (except 4333) and 1♥ is usually a five-card suit also (except 44(23) and 3433). If playing strong notrump, it seems like this style is not very effective. You very occasionally have this horrible shape (like 4333) with minimum values where partner's raises in competition get you in trouble. It seems clear that 5cM/strong notrump is better than 4cM strong notrump in this style.

There is an alternative style of four-card majors where you try to open a four-card major as much as possible (like always open a major with 4M-4m hands, and sometimes with 4M-5m hands if rebids seem awkward otherwise or suit quality dictates, etc). This style has a big advantage in preempting your opponents (takes up space, keeps them guessing in competition). However, it occasionally also gets your side guessing in competitive situations, means you play a fair number of moysians (which can be good or bad) and can make it hard to unravel hands in non-competitive situations because there are so many possible distributions in the 1M opening. Playing weak notrumps, it seems wrong to open in this style because you're effectively "preempting" with your good hands (the 4M openings are often on a strong notrump).

So I think one can make a point that if you play 4cM/weak notrump you should bid up-the-line (giving yourself more space when you have the strong notrump hand) whereas if you play 4cM/strong notrump you should open 1M as much as possible on minimum openers to maximize the preemptive effect (possibly sacrificing your own slam bidding, but so be it).

[EricK]

Bidding is a matter of trade-offs.And this question touches on the major one - how much emphasis do you place on uncontested bidding; how much do you place on contested bidding; and how much do you place on trying to prevent the opponents from contesting in the first place.

If you knew for a fact that the opponents were going to stay silent on a deal, then you would arrange your bidding system such that each potential opening bid was more likely than the next higher bid, and that higher bids are more descriptive than lower bids. Of the systems under discussion, 5 card majors especially with a strong NT best fits this pattern.

If, on the other hand, you knew for certain that LHO was going to make some overcall, you would like to be playing a system where your first bid gives as much description as possible. If, for example you knew LHO was going to overcall 2♣, you would like to be playing a system where all the 1 level opening bids were equally likely to occur and equally (maximally) descriptive of hand type. Playing 4 card majors really helps in this regard.. Even more so with a weak NT.

But note the paradox - The system which hopes opponents won't intervene contains a lot of 1m openings, so is the one they are most easily able to intervene over. Whereas the system which assumes the opponents will come in actually makes it harder for them to come in!

But perhaps 4cd M plus weak NT is overkill. It is the weaker hands where it pays most to keep the opponenets out, and weak balanced hands can often open 1M anyway. Similarly, 5card majors and strong NT, despite it's popularity, is perhaps going too far the other way, in ignoring the opponents. Of the remaing systems, 5cd M plus Weak NT is more geared towards scientific, constructive bidding than 4cd majors plus strong NT. The latter is more geared towards bashing to likely looking contracts and leaving the defense in the dark as much as possible.

Probably what is most important though, is knowing the strengths and weaknesses of your chosen system. If for instance you play strong NT and 5cd majors, it is vital to ensure you make the most of whatever uncontested auctions you do have otherwise you are throwing away your main advantage.

[nigel_k]

Playing four card majors, if you open four card suits 'up the line', you can switch to five card majors and just trade increased ambiguity when opening a minor for reduced ambiguity when opening a major which to me is a clear gain. You can also play forcing NT and GF 2/1 which is very awkward with four card majors.

If you open a four card major before a four card minor, I'd say you are not doing it primarily for the preemptive effect as Adam suggested. You're doing it for the negative inferences when a major is not opened and because 15+ balanced hands usually play in either NT or a 4-4 major fit anyway so you can avoid telling opponents what minor suit you have. So this has benefits regardless of the NT range used. But I'm not suggesting they outweigh the losses.

[helene_t]

EricK, on Jun 10 2010, 08:30 AM, said:

If, on the other hand, you knew for certain that LHO was going to make some overcall, you would like to be playing a system where your first bid gives as much description as possible. If, for example you knew LHO was going to overcall 2♣, you would like to be playing a system where all the 1 level opening bids were equally likely to occur and equally (maximally) descriptive of hand type. Playing 4 card majors really helps in this regard.. Even more so with a weak NT.

You certainly have a point. My feeling (just feeling, not based on research) is that when opener's LHO overcalls I am generally more comfortable playing English Acol than playing other styles. But OTHO:

- It is not obvious that taking the 12-14 bal out of the suit openings is more helpful in competition than is taking the 15-17 bal out. Yes, responder can double or raise more aggressively, but on the other hand he also has to to act more aggressively in order to protect opener's 15-16 balanced hand which will usually not be able to reopen if responder passes. Fred argues that weak notrump systems are more difficult in contested auctions than are strong strong notrump systems and that he wouldn't recommend weak notrump to anyone who isn't prepared to put a lot of work into system discussions.

- While it's true that a five-card majors system puts more hands into the minor suit openings than into the major suit openings, it is not necessarily true that the minor suit openings contain more different types of hand that are relevant to distinguish. When partner opens a minor suit, I often don't care about his length in the opening suit at all, and even when I do care about it I often don't need to know the exact length. Suppose it goes
1♣-(1♠)
Playing English Acol, I know that opener doesn't have a balanced hand with four hearts. But is that really helpful? He could still have an unbalanced hand with four hearts, so we still define dbl as showing 4+hearts. Also if it goes
1♥-(3♠)
is is really helpful to know that opener has at least five hearts. OTOH, if it goes
1♣-(3♠)
it is somewhat helpful to know that opener has at least four (probably five) clubs, and not four hearts unless his hand is unbalanced. But does it make a big difference?

- When there is an overcall in the sandwich position, I would rather play strong notrump than weak notrump. Some people think that you can't play support dbls because dbl is necessary to show the 15-16 balanced hand. I don't agree with that, I think responder is awkwardly placed over a double that includes 15-16 balanced hands. I think opener must pass smoothly unless his balanced hand happens to meet whatever criteria you have for a t/o or support double. But then maybe opps can steal from you if it goes
1♣-(p)-1♠-(2♦)
p-(3♦)-a.p.

[hotShot]

I have played 4cM "up the line" successfully with both strong and weak NT for years.

The reason we switched to 5cM/strong NT was that opener could not make a valid decision to compete in contested auctions like:
1♥ - 1♠/2m - 2♥ - pass/2♠/3m
?
Since partner could have gone for a 4-3 fit, you don't know if your fit is 7/8 or (if opener happens to have 5cards) 8/9 cards.

[NickRW]

helene_t, on Jun 11 2010, 08:37 AM, said:

...Fred argues that weak notrump systems are more difficult in contested auctions than are strong strong notrump systems and that he wouldn't recommend weak notrump to anyone who isn't prepared to put a lot of work into system discussions...

One minor point - I suspect Fred's advice is entirely sound for those used to 5cM and strong NT - but it works the other way too - you can't simply swap from 4cM and weak NT to the other extreme without a lot of examination of the implications in all sorts of both contested and uncontested sequences.

I think you probably can swap from 4cM with weak NT to 5cM with weak NT relatively easily - indeed it (along with just 5c♠/weak) is a common variant found in Britain - it seems to me that it is swapping the NT range that has the biggest implications.

Though I'd recommend against it personally, I think the 5cM strong NT crowd would find it easier to go to 4cM with strong than than they would to take on the KS system with its 5cM/weak option - dunno - I'm not from the rest of the world - just my hunch.

Having said what we all have (generally that none of us likes 4cM and strong) it has been played successfully at the highest levels and in recent times too.

Nick

[NickRW]

hotShot, on Jun 11 2010, 10:36 AM, said:

I have played 4cM "up the line" successfully with both strong and weak NT for years.

The reason we switched to 5cM/strong NT was that opener could not make a valid decision to compete in contested auctions like:
1♥ - 1♠/2m - 2♥ - pass/2♠/3m
?
Since partner could have gone for a 4-3 fit, you don't know if your fit is 7/8 or (if opener happens to have 5cards) 8/9 cards.

Yeah - while I personally think that this argument is overweighted by some - never the less it is the killer argument for many.

Nick

[hrothgar]

NickRW, on Jun 11 2010, 06:15 PM, said:

hotShot, on Jun 11 2010, 10:36 AM, said:

I have played 4cM "up the line" successfully with both strong and weak NT for years.

The reason we switched to 5cM/strong NT was that opener could not make a valid decision to compete in contested auctions like:
1♥ - 1♠/2m - 2♥ - pass/2♠/3m
?
Since partner could have gone for a 4-3 fit, you don't know if your fit is 7/8 or (if opener happens to have 5cards)  8/9 cards.

Yeah - while I personally think that this argument is overweighted by some - never the less it is the killer argument for many.

Nick

When I play 4 card majors, we always raise with 3 card support

Yes, we play a lot of Moysians at the two level, but it seems to work out quite well.

[gwnn]

Frances said that 4cM is best with strong NT and weak NT is best with 5cM, I seem to recall (I don't know whether her statement was stronger, i.e. whether she included the inverses: strong NT is best with 4cM and 5cM is best with weak NT). Also Fred said that it is a very bad idea to open 1M on a 4 card suit and strong NT values.

Why is that, I can't tell you exactly. But I think these were their opinions.

[hotShot]

NickRW, on Jun 11 2010, 04:15 PM, said:

hotShot, on Jun 11 2010, 10:36 AM, said:

I have played 4cM "up the line" successfully with both strong and weak NT for years.

The reason we switched to 5cM/strong NT was that opener could not make a valid decision to compete in contested auctions like:
1♥ - 1♠/2m - 2♥ - pass/2♠/3m
?
Since partner could have gone for a 4-3 fit, you don't know if your fit is 7/8 or (if opener happens to have 5cards)  8/9 cards.

Yeah - while I personally think that this argument is overweighted by some - never the less it is the killer argument for many.

Nick

Well for us the real killer argument was, that our 4cM/strong NT system was incredibly simple. There are several solution for the problem, but all lead to more complexity.
To our surprise we found that switching from 4cM/strong NT to 5cM/strong NT had very little side effects within our simple system.

[EricK]

I think the key auction is 1x 2y 2NT.

Traditionally, playing 4cd major and strong NT, 2NT in the above auction was non-forcing. That put responder in a difficult position if he had a balanced 11 points - the partnership might have 25 points, or might have only 23 points.

The only real way around that is to play 2/1 as GF. Playing 5 card majors with a strong NT, you have the alternative option of rebidding the major on a balanced 5332 hand.

So if you don't want to play 2/1 as GF, 4cd majors and strong NT doesn't really work well. But if you are happy to play 2/1 as GF then it certainly does work.

[helene_t]

Yeah, if you play 4-card majors and strong notrump you may want to keep the range of the balanced hands below the opening range narrower, 12-13 or 13-14. Alternatively you can respond 2NT with the balanced 11-counts (not very attractive) or fake a reverse with the balanced 14-counts. Or play the 3NT rebid as 14 points and then fake a reverse with the 18-19 hands. The latter may be more attractive if you open 4-card majors only with the balanced 12-14 and not with the 18-19 points, which makes a lot of sense.

[wank]

we play 2/1 as gf opposite a nt rebid, but that opener can give NF preference to opener's major - this means on misfits you can bail at the 2 level.