[the hog]

Jinksy, on 2014-May-10, 10:35, said:

This is starting to feel like cyberstalking. If you have no argument to make and nothing friendly to say, kindly stop singling out my posts for your lazy abuse.

Not at all. The op said he was playing Acol. You made totally incorrect comment in that context. The only onclusion possible is that you know nothing about Acol; so why post a comment?

[Jinksy]

A comment that various other people in the thread echoed, none of whom you've chosen to harass here.

As for knowing nothing about Acol, I live in the UK and play 'it' more than any other system. But 'Acol' in theory is a specific set of agreements memorialised on some document in the Acol club, which even the oldest players would consider too archaic to follow consistently (even if anyone knew exactly what it consisted of, which I'm willing to bet you don't). 'Acol' in practice is is wide array of partnership agreements starting with '4 card majors and weak NT' and having little more necessarily in common with each other than that, which is what I play - and it certainly does not have a baked-in meaning for the sequence above.

You might disagree with my reasoning as to why 2N is plausibly NF (perhaps one day you'll explain why if you have the wit), but you now need to acknowledge that I know something about Acol. So your comment was either prejudiced and based on your own ignorance, or abuse - hence cyberstalking. Which is it?

[Zelandakh]

It seems to me perfectly possible to play 2NT as not forcing here. Better still would be some form of Good/Bad. But it would be dangerous to do either without any agreement. Similarly, this seems like a good spot for transfers. The fact that the system is Acol is not really important other than that the NT range is weak.

From what I can see about the discussion Jinksy said he would rebid 3♥ too, so you are both in agreement. His argument was that disucussing the sequence and the possibility of playing 2NT as something other than 15+ balanced would be a good idea. Surely we can agree on that? It is always a good idea to discuss potentially awkward competitive sequences. So let's drop the clueless/stalker comments now, ok?

[Jinksy]

Zel, I'm not planning to pursue any vendetta against hog, nor am I a scared little teen, but I'm getting tired with him a) singling out my posts from a number that have reached the same conclusion to abuse me personally, and b) refusing to advance any argument for his position/against mine.

If he stops doing either, fine - end of story. If he keeps both up, then I hope the moderators will take action to stop it, so that I can enjoy this forum without a nagging feeling that I'm going to be attacked by a one-man lynch mob.

[FrancesHinden]

Jinksy, on 2014-May-11, 04:11, said:

'Acol' in practice is is wide array of partnership agreements starting with '4 card majors and weak NT' and having little more necessarily in common with each other than that, which is what I play - and it certainly does not have a baked-in meaning for the sequence above.

There's nothing about weak NT which is specific to Acol. It was originally a strong NT, then variable. Acol is natural-based, 4-card majors and limit bidding (and in theory also has Acol two-bids). It's a 'bid what you feel like' system rather than any structured set of agreements.

As for this sequence, it's (IMO) unplayable to say that 2NT must be strong even if playing a weak NT. What are you supposed to rebid on a minimum 2542, 1543 or 2533 ?
I just asked Jallerton, who has won the English Premier League and the Camrose playing weak NT and Acol, and in his partnership 2NT is a minimum opening and non-forcing.

[Quartic]

Thanks for the replies everyone. I bid 2NT at the table, but I wasn't sure if it showed what I wanted it to show. I will discuss this again with my partner so we have a clear agreement.

[jallerton]

campboy, on 2014-May-10, 08:08, said:

I think it's completely wrong for 2NT to show extras here if 2♠ is forcing (and yes, I do play a weak NT). You could well have no other call on an unbalanced minimum (typically a hand which would have bid 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♦ in an uncontested auction). If it had gone 1♠ (2♦) 2♥ it would be a different story, since 2 of opener's suit would still be available for a hand with nothing better to do.

Correct. However, I have come across people who have assumed this sequence to be forcing, so it's worth people discussing this sequence with their partners. In fact, this whole 1♥-(2♦)-2♠[forcing]-(P) start is a theoretical mess. If Opener rebids 3♣ is that forcing or not? On some hands, you'd want the answer to be yes; on others you'd prefer not. There's even a case for playing Opener's 2NT as Lebensohl here.

[steve2005]

the hog, on 2014-May-10, 08:14, said:

Another poster who has clearly never played Acol. In Acol this is 15-a poor18, end of story.<br><br></p><p><br><br><br> </p><p> </p>

Ive played Acol for a long time. In Canada, in competition a non-jump 2N rebid can just be stopper. If you have a real strong NT you can bid 3N.

The problem is this is an 8 loser hand with few of its pts in its long suit. I wouldn't even open a weak 2 (if playing them) never mind 1♥

[helene_t]

Trinidad, on 2014-May-08, 13:41, said:

I always thought that in Acol non jumps at the two level in suits that were hindered by the overcall were NFBs, showing about 8-11, so I would pass.

Am I completely wrong here?

Rik

Some teachers (using Henderson's book, for example) teach this (and, consequently, that the 2NT rebid is 15-16 or such, as most awkward hands will pass the 2♠ bid).

But by far the most common agreement is that 2♠ is forcing and, cosequently, that the 2NT rebid is an awkward hand with 11-14 or such.

[Zelandakh]

Zelandakh, on 2014-May-11, 06:00, said:

Better still would be some form of Good/Bad.

jallerton, on 2014-May-11, 16:33, said:

There's even a case for playing Opener's 2NT as Lebensohl here.

Always pleased when one of our experts is in agreement with me on something . Have you considered the transfer scheme here as an alternative to non-forcing? Is obviously worse for a minimum 2542 but seems like it might be an overall plus.

[akwoo]

Concerning whether to play 2♠ forcing and 2N afterwards as 11-14, or 2♠ as non-forcing and 2N afterwards as 15-16...

Does it matter whether 1♥-1♠-1N shows 15-17 or not (and hence whether 1N is usually bid on 3532 hands with 12-14 or not)? It seems the first agreement makes more sense if not, and the second makes more sense if so.

BTW, even playing 2♠ non-forcing, I would bid 3♥ rather than pass here, though it's close

[steve2005]

Quartic, on 2014-May-07, 16:14, said:

---

You're playing modern Acol with a competent partner in a club teams event. 1♥ promises 4+ hearts, 11+ hcp. Your 1NT opening is 12-14.

---

Lets change the hand slightly. Now you have a real 1♥ not a pile of trash. But with a singleton ♠, only 5♥, ♦ well stopped and non-biddable ♣.

I submit to you with this hand your only bid in any reasonable system is a non-forcing 2N. if you bid anything else you will never get to 3N when its right!

[Nabooba]

This is an interesting thread. I have played Acol for a long time and successfully in National Championships. To play a 2NT rebid s just showing a stopper and not as 15-17 is unworkable, the comments made by previous posters aside. Lets say you have a reasonable 16count. With this you are forced to bid 3NT playing your style, because 2NT shows a minimum and can be passed. If you don't bid 3NT and partner raises to 3NT you are then almost forced to bid 4NT to show the additional values. Anyway 3NT takes up too much room and does not allow for sensible exploration.I know of noone who plays it the way some people above have described it.

[Vampyr]

Nabooba, on 2014-May-12, 17:44, said:

This is an interesting thread. I have played Acol for a long time and successfully in National Championships. To play a 2NT rebid s just showing a stopper and not as 15-17 is unworkable, the comments made by previous posters aside. Lets say you have a reasonable 16count. With this you are forced to bid 3NT playing your style, because 2NT shows a minimum and can be passed. If you don't bid 3NT and partner raises to 3NT you are then almost forced to bid 4NT to show the additional values. Anyway 3NT takes up too much room and does not allow for sensible exploration.I know of noone who plays it the way some people above have described it.

I am with you in principle, that is how I play it, but the fact that JAllerton plays it differently is pretty strong evidence that this approach is wrong.

[steve2005]

Nabooba, on 2014-May-12, 17:44, said:

This is an interesting thread. I have played Acol for a long time and successfully in National Championships. To play a 2NT rebid s just showing a stopper and not as 15-17 is unworkable, the comments made by previous posters aside. Lets say you have a reasonable 16count. With this you are forced to bid 3NT playing your style, because 2NT shows a minimum and can be passed. If you don't bid 3NT and partner raises to 3NT you are then almost forced to bid 4NT to show the additional values. Anyway 3NT takes up too much room and does not allow for sensible exploration.I know of noone who plays it the way some people above have described it.

then what do you bid with 1♠5 crappy ♥ 4 good ♦ and 3 good ♣ and 12-14 pts ?

[akwoo]

steve2005, on 2014-May-12, 19:07, said:

then what do you bid with 1♠5 crappy ♥ 4 good ♦ and 3 good ♣ and 12-14 pts ?

The corollary of playing 2N as showing 15-17 is playing 2♠ as non-forcing. In that case, pass is bad on this hand, but probably less bad than any alternative.

[steve2005]

---

quote from book Acol in Competition by E Crowhurst pg 96, disturbed auctions

"Bid 2♦. It is a pity to hide a respectable 5-card ♥ suit but this hand is not good enough to warrant the strength showing bid of 2♥. Since partner may have to rebid 2NT on a complete minimum hand, 2♥ should guarantee at least 10-11 hcp"

weird hand, but the point is that opener may have to bid 2N on a minimum hand according to Crowhurst.

[Nabooba]

steve2005, on 2014-May-12, 19:07, said:

then what do you bid with 1♠5 crappy ♥ 4 good ♦ and 3 good ♣ and 12-14 pts ?

There are a number of points here. If there had been no intervention, what would you bid? 2D I guess. So now you make the same bid one level higher. This shows that the 2S bid cant be weak but has to be forcing to game with one exception and that is responder rebidding his suit. With a lesser hand you would have to make a negative double.
Another method is to play a system which one poster above described. Responders lower ranking suits are forcing, and higher ranking suits are non forcing. This is not uncommon and works well. No poster has yet responded to my claim that if you make a wide ranging 2NT rebid the auction is virtually forced to 4NT if opener has 16 or 17.
Mr Vmpyr, appeals to authority cut no ice with me. If they did everyone in the world would be playing Meckstroth style Big Club, wouldnt they?

[helene_t]

Nabooba, on 2014-May-13, 04:35, said:

No poster has yet responded to my claim that if you make a wide ranging 2NT rebid the auction is virtually forced to 4NT if opener has 16 or 17.

Nobody says 2NT should be wide ranging. You bid it with 11-14 or such. If partner bids 3NT you pass.

I suppose you might bid 2NT also with some 15 counts that have depreciated due to the auction, but in principle the 3NT rebid is 15-19.

[GBinUS]

helene_t, on 2014-May-13, 05:01, said:

Nobody says 2NT should be wide ranging. You bid it with 11-14 or such. If partner bids 3NT you pass.

I suppose you might bid 2NT also with some 15 counts that have depreciated due to the auction, but in principle the 3NT rebid is 15-19.

The problem is that you opened those 11-14 hands 1NT.

So to rebid 2NT here suggests more. Of course, it is my contention that after an overcall, partner's response in a higher ranking suit than my opening bid is near GF, and so I have no problem bidding 2NT because that would be the weakest bid I can make. (But then I play much more 2/1 than Acol these days).

I prefer 2NT here because I cannot bring myself to bid 3♥ with that lousy suit, nor can I stand p passing me out in 3♥ with a small singleton. I'm not sure where my tricks are coming from, but I do know that I'm unlikely to be doubled in 2NT but I might get axed for 500 in 3♥.

Who opened this heap of crap anyway?