[el mister]

Acol plays a weak NT and 4 card majors. SAYC uses a strong NT and 5 cM - (Also see some Dutch pairs playing this as Dutch Acol ).

Are the other two permutations playable - 4cM and a strong NT, 5 cM and a weak NT?

The first of these in particular I have never encountered, although I've not been playing that long so that probably doesn't mean much. Is it deeply flawed in some way?

[hanp]

4cM and strong notrump is old fashioned Dutch Acol, and still taught to beginners in the Netherlands.

Weak notrumps with 5-card majors is one of the cornerstone of Kaplan-Sheinwold. I think Martel-Stansby still play this combination.

[hrothgar]

Blue Club was based on 4 card majors and a strongish NT.

1NT shows either 16-17 OR
13-15 with 3=3=2=5 / 3=3=3=4 shape

4 card majors and strong NT isn't particularly popular. I seem to recall at least one reasonable source claiming that this combination is flawed. (Might have been Robson and Segal)

[helene_t]

The Scanian system is 14-16 1NT combined with 4-card majors for the 11-13 range and 5-card majors for the 17-19 range.

Swiss Acol is weak notrump with 4-card hearts and 5-card Spades.

Norwegian Standard is similar but with strong notrump.

hrothgar said:

4 card majors and strong NT isn't particularly popular. I seem to recall at least one reasonable source claiming that this combination is flawed. (Might have been Robson and Segal)

Yeah their argument is that partner is in a difficult position when opps interfere over a 1M opening that might be a weak hand with a four-card in the opening suit.

FWIW I don't really find that very convincing. Yeah it's true but other systems have other drawbacks. I think weak NT with 4-card majors is impractical since you don't have a rebid after 1M-1NT: you want to pass with 13 and bid 2NT with 18 but with 15-16 you don't want to do either. Also, one of the advantages of 4-card majors is that 1M openings are preemptive but you want to preempt with 12 points, not with 16 (or 19 for that matter).

[NickRW]

Strong NT and 4cM was the way Acol was taught in the 16-18NT days and for a while when 15-17 or variable NT caught on. If you're opening majors first when 4M4m and especially if you're doing 2/1 as weak as Acol typically does, then I really don't want to be your partner if I can avoid it - it seems to be an awkward mix to me. If you're opening your 4/4 shapes up the line, then it starts to get more comfortable in my view - but I never see the point of not at least going to 5 card spades then - and if you're shoving 4=3=3=3 into 1♣, then you might as well shove 3=4=3=3 in there as well - which makes your 1♥ opener guarantee 5 or 4/4 majors - which firms that opening up a little. Going all the way to 5 card both majors is - well - simple - though I am less convinced of the cost/benefit. So strong NT and 4cM is sorta "yeah, but".

Weak NT and 5cM or 5c♠ works fine in my view if thats your poison.

Nick

[helene_t]

NickRW, on Jun 8 2010, 06:25 PM, said:

If you're opening majors first when 4M4m and especially if you're doing 2/1 as weak as Acol typically does, then I really don't want to be your partner

Yeah obviously if you play that a 1M opening includes balanced 12-14 hands then a 1NT response is 6-10. If opener passes 1NT he has a balanced 12-14, so if you want to play 1NT opposite a 12-14 hand then you bid .... guess what .... 1NT!

I don't know why they teach 6-9 rather than 6-10 to beginners in the Netherlands. Maybe it's a left-over from the 16-18 days.

[junyi_zhu]

hrothgar, on Jun 8 2010, 04:28 PM, said:

Blue Club was based on 4 card majors and a strongish NT.

1NT shows either 16-17 OR
13-15 with 3=3=2=5 / 3=3=3=4 shape

4 card majors and strong NT isn't particularly popular. I seem to recall at least one reasonable source claiming that this combination is flawed. (Might have been Robson and Segal)

I think it's a good combination. Often, the time you can make a lot of money from opening 4 card Major is when you are rather weak. For example:
1S p 2S p p 3C x. When you open 4 card 1M mostly with 15-17 HCP, you just miss the best part of the system. Of course, you can't play an acol kind of super light 2/1 over 1M, which is actually very very bad even if you play weak NT 4 card major IMO. The biggest problem for the super light 2/1 style is that it has too many ways to sign off but few ways to set up trumps and force to game.
In some sense, a 2/1 gameforcing with 4 card major and 14-16 1NT is certainly a very good system by nature. Of course, some response structure need to be revised, like 1M 2C as a two way bid to show either true clubs gf or 3 card limit raise.

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.

[el mister]

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?

[helene_t]

There is no consensus.

IMHO when chosing your system you make a choice: do you want to open a balanced hand with a 4-card major 1M, or not?

Obviously there are advantages to open the major (you get a more relevant feature of the hand across immediately, you avoid the issue of whether you play Walsh or not, you preempt opps, you conceal minor suits that may be helpful to opps when defending but probably not so relevant for determining the best contract).

If the answer is yes, then open 1M whenever you have a balanced hand with a four-card major.

If the answer is no, then play 5-card majors.

I can imagine that you would "sometimes" open a balanced hand with a 4-card major 1M. It may depend on the quality of the suit or the strength of the hand. Or maybe 1♥ promises 4+ while 1♠ promises 5+ (although I certainly wouldn't recommend this to beginners and intermediates: having different definitions of the 1♥ and 1♠ opening makes life unnecessarily complicated).

But letting it depend on whether or not you have a 4-card minor seems strange to me. Compare
Axx
KJxx
AJx
xxx
to
Axx
KJxx
AJ
xxxx

Those two hands both are balanced 13-counts with three spades and four hearts (and a diamond feature also if partner asks at that level of detail). Assuming 13 points is not in our point range, you make a choice: open these hands 1♥ or not open 1♥.

Of course this argument would also suggest that standard 5-card majors is flawed, too, since it doesn't matter much whether you open those hand 1♣ or 1♦. That's another discussion.

[OleBerg]

In Denmark (especially in Copenhagen), 5CM and 12-14NT is widespread at the highest levels. It is played in a "not 2/1 context" however. At a glance it would seem to me, that it could work as well in a 2/1 system.

[MickyB]

Agree with Helene's last post - when I play four-card majors, I open the major not just on 4M4m but on some 4M5m 11-13s as well. This is in the context of 14-16 NT and 2/1 GF in 1st+2nd postion, and 15-17 NT in 3rd+4th. It's not an easy style to play, though. As Junyi said, it is usually played with 1M:2C as either GF natural or a three-card limit raise. The reason for this is that you otherwise have no suitable bid to make on, say, a 3145 10/11-count - if you simply bid 2M on these hands it lands up having a very wide range.

Weak NT and four-card majors is the worst, theoretically, it has few advantages over weak NT and five-card majors. This is why you get people opening the minor playing Acol, IMO - they've worked out that opening the major is bad, but they can't bring themselves to make the switch to fives, or want their minors to guarantee four cards! Great.

Playing weak NT and five-card majors, you have to decide whether 1M:2X is going to be 9+, meaning that after 1M:1NT, 15-16 balanced can pass; Or whether a 2/1 is GF, in which case you have to rebid 2m on those hands. The latter has its benefits, but it make 2/1s worst auction even more problematic - 1H:1N, 2D:2H where 2H shows 5-10 points and opener doesn't know whether to take another bid on a 16-count.

[gwnn]

well you will rebid 2♣ on all 5332 assumedly if you want to use that system

[OleBerg]

At another glance:

At IMP's I would never play 4-card major.

At MP's I would have no problem at all with it. (And I would open Major before minor, or maybe ♥-♣-♠-♦ if someone provided good arguments.)

EDIT: And NT-range (MP's) is simply "Against the field". If I am better than the field, it wont matter, and if I am weaker, it will give me the chance to get lucky. In a short tourney, where I considered me and my partners declarer-skills to be superior, I might switch to "With the field".

[bill1157]

Unless you are playing a canape system the frequency with which a 1S opening would be 4 cards is so low that you would be better off playing 1S opening shows a 5 card suit.
There may be some advantage to opening 1H with a 4 card suit.

Bill

[TMorris]

MickyB, on Jun 9 2010, 01:24 PM, said:

Weak NT and four-card majors is the worst, theoretically, it has few advantages over weak NT and five-card majors.

Can you explain why. I see people saying this all the time but no-one either explains or (just as good/better) points to a source that I can read which clarifies this comment. Something explaining why it worse than using a strong NT etc... would also be great if you can comment or have a link.

I understand with a weak NT & 4-card majors that the auction 1M-1NT (I play 2/1 is 10+here) causes problems but presume that there are other issues.

Thanks

[helene_t]

Yes, the responses to the major suit openings is the main problem.

You can't respond 1NT with a decent 9-count since opener will pass with 15 and most 16 counts.

This means that many bids over a 2/1 have to be nonforcing and both partner's have to jump or introduce fake suits to create a force just with modest extras. For example,
1♥-2♦
3♥*
just shows six hearts and 14+ points or such, that is very inaccurate. And if opener has diamond support and extras, he can't show the support without bypassing 3NT (unless he can make a 3♠ splinter bid).
If responder bids the suit under opener's suit, (1♥-2♦ or 1♠-2♥), then the only rebids opener can make that don't promise extras is to bid his suit again or to raise responder's suit. This means that he has to rebid 2M on even a bad 5-card suit, risking responder passes it with a singleton.

If opener has a strong balanced hand, we get auctions like
1♠-1NT
2NT-3♥
Does this show a 5-card heart suit and some 8 points, choice of game? Or is is a 6-card heart suit with 5-7 points, nonforcing? You really want to play 2NT here as 18-19 so that you don't need the latter.

Finally, if opener has 19 points, it goes
1♠-1NT
3NT-?
and since opener here may have 2 or 3 hearts, and 4 or 5 spades, responder will often just have to hope that 3NT is the right contract.

Another issue is that it is much more attractive to open a 4-card major when you have a weak hand than when you have a strong hand. Getting the major suit in early is good for competitive auctions which is more important when you have a weak hand. When you have a strong hand, emphasis should be on constructive bidding.

If you play weak NT and 5-card majors you can play a forcing 1NT response (opener rebids a 3-card minor with a 15-17 5332 shape). So 2/1 responses can be GF (or almost GF if you prefer).

[MickyB]

gwnn, on Jun 9 2010, 02:01 PM, said:

well you will rebid 2♣ on all 5332 assumedly if you want to use that system

Yes, you are right Csaba - then, obviously, you have enough space to solve the problem.

[Pict]

I've played Acol weak NT, absolutely standard 44 up the line, like it.

I've tried same with 4-card major first, doesn't work for me, hated it.

The spades are 5 seems pointless to me.

Played 5CM strong NT - pleasant enough.

Played 5CM and 5D (except 4441) strong NT - pleasant enough.

My experience is it depends on your partner, your ambition, the culture you are playing in. Place your bets.

[nigel_k]

Five card majors works equally well with a 12-14 or 15-17 NT as far as I know - just choose the range you prefer.

With four card majors it's much more complicated and depends on how you open and rebid. But I don't think four card majors and strong NT is unplayable (though I haven't played it and probably wouldn't).

[NickRW]

TMorris, on Jun 9 2010, 04:28 PM, said:

MickyB, on Jun 9 2010, 01:24 PM, said:

Weak NT and four-card majors is the worst, theoretically, it has few advantages over weak NT and five-card majors.

Can you explain why. I see people saying this all the time but no-one either explains or (just as good/better) points to a source that I can read which clarifies this comment. Something explaining why it worse than using a strong NT etc... would also be great if you can comment or have a link.

I understand with a weak NT & 4-card majors that the auction 1M-1NT (I play 2/1 is 10+here) causes problems but presume that there are other issues.

Thanks

Some, quite a lot actually, is purely opinion and what you're used to. So when people say "x is good" a lot of what they present as fact is coloured by their experience which may not be as complete or as unbiased as they think. I am not trying to say people are giving bad advice or anything like that - just that getting to the core solid facts is actually not as easy as one might suppose.

You should probably think of weak NT and 4cM, majors first at one end of a spectrum and 5cM, strong NT as the other end (actually, playing 5 card diamonds as well as the majors is probably the extreme end - but thats complicating it).

The nearest I can give as solid facts are that weak NT and 4cM is quite preemptive and gets right to the point (focusing on the majors) - it seems to play very well at match points where doubles and overcalls that might be considered suicidal at IMPs are common place. But when you're playing IMPs and opps will not be so keen to interrupt your auction on a whiff of an extra 10 points risking 200 against, the preemptive effect mainly works against you instead of for you. Strong NT and beefing up your major openings means that you open 1m a lot more - which means quite a lot of extra bidding room you can put to good use - if you're cute enough - but it takes some non Acol like thinking to actually put that space to real use - which is not that difficult if you're not born in Acol land as you won't be in that mindset in the first place - if you are born here it takes quite a bit of study and cultivating partners with a similar wish to learn etc. Similarly it is hard for the rest of the world to see the brighter side of 4cM and weak NT - which it does have.

Some will argue in favour of 5cM even at match points stating things like raising partner's major is easier when you know they've got 5 - which is a valid point - though I have yet to see any way of quantifying all the pros and cons.

Nick