[Cyberyeti]

Dealt in practice, so no vulnerability: 2/1 NOT GF

---

If you blackwood:

Spoiler

Partner shows 2 without the Q

[straube]

I was passing 4S. I'm used to 2/1 GF so opener could have a little more but he I'm expecting hands like...

AKJ9xxx Kx x Kxx
AKQJxx Kxx x xxx
AQJTxx xxx x Axx
AKJTxx Kxx xx Kx

If I did learn pd had two without the Q I'm signing off in 5S.

Curious if 1S-2D, 4S-5H would pinpoint my problem or not. Do you have club control and are your spades solid?

Interesting problem. Will look back to see what others think.

[bluenikki]

straube, on 2023-September-30, 09:35, said:

I was passing 4S. I'm used to 2/1 GF so opener could have a little more but he I'm expecting hands like...

AKJ9xxx Kx x Kxx
AKQJxx Kxx x xxx
AQJTxx xxx x Axx
AKJTxx Kxx xx Kx

If I did learn pd had two without the Q I'm signing off in 5S.

Curious if 1S-2D, 4S-5H would pinpoint my problem or not. Do you have club control and are your spades solid?

Interesting problem. Will look back to see what others think.

Normally (I believe) 5♥ would ask about clubs and 5♠ would ask about spades.

[Cyberyeti]

straube, on 2023-September-30, 09:35, said:

I was passing 4S. I'm used to 2/1 GF so opener could have a little more but he I'm expecting hands like...

AKJ9xxx Kx x Kxx
AKQJxx Kxx x xxx
AQJTxx xxx x Axx
AKJTxx Kxx xx Kx

If I did learn pd had two without the Q I'm signing off in 5S.

Curious if 1S-2D, 4S-5H would pinpoint my problem or not. Do you have club control and are your spades solid?

Interesting problem. Will look back to see what others think.

I think you can assume at least 7 spades and not as much as hand 1 where 6N is good. Some of these are 3♠ rebids.

Normally 4♠ for us would be "I'm just too good to open 4♠" (we don't have a "good 4♠" opener

[straube]

Cyberyeti, on 2023-September-30, 10:18, said:

I think you can assume at least 7 spades and not as much as hand 1 where 6N is good. Some of these are 3♠ rebids.

Normally 4♠ for us would be "I'm just too good to open 4♠" (we don't have a "good 4♠" opener

3S has to be stronger than 4S, even playing 2/1 not game forcing; there isn't room to invite opposite an invite and you need a bid to show a strong hand, set trump and force cue-bidding. You play 2D promises a rebid? If so some minimums with 7 spades and a more broken suit could rebid 2S and then 3S nf, but the hands I gave would want to be in game and announce a self-sufficient suit and a hand too good to preempt 4S.

[mikeh]

I have no experience playing a method in which a 2S rebid isn’t a one round force, even when 2D doesn’t create a game force. I do understand, perhaps wrongly, that in old fashioned Acol, 2S would not be forcing. Such an approach, if I have it right, is probably a huge reason why you don’t see any such methods in use at the higher levels of the game…the need to distort opener’s hand whenever he has even modest extras renders constructive bidding very difficult.

I say this because in 40 years of 2/1 I have never seen any hand that should jump to 4S over a 2/1 response. How on earth that’s playable is beyond me. When 2S is forcing (even just for one round) then opener can and should rebid 2S or 3S. 3S should be a solid suit, forcing to game. 2S is all other spade rebids, including those worth a game force but lacking solid spades (planning to make a forcing bid next time). All this, obviously, merely my opinion.

But if 2S would be passable, then presumably, as Straube says, 4S is weaker than 3S.

If I had to guess a hand it would definitely NOT hold a control in the unbid suits. Something like AKQJxxx xx Kx xx. Obviously he doesn’t have that.

Thus this problem lacks much interest: we’re being forced to guess while playing an unplayable method. I see no logical reason for this inferring a club control. If I did guess to keycard, and why any coherent system would leave this as a guess in an unobstructed auction is a mystery, obviously I play 5S opposite 2 without the queen (wtf????).

[Cyberyeti]

straube, on 2023-September-30, 10:34, said:

3S has to be stronger than 4S, even playing 2/1 not game forcing; there isn't room to invite opposite an invite and you need a bid to show a strong hand, set trump and force cue-bidding. You play 2D promises a rebid? If so some minimums with 7 spades and a more broken suit could rebid 2S and then 3S nf, but the hands I gave would want to be in game and announce a self-sufficient suit and a hand too good to preempt 4S.

3♠ isn't even forcing opposite a misfitting 9-10 count for us. 2♦ doesn't promise a rebid, can pass 2♠.

We have a GF not necessarily balanced 2N rebid for the really good hands (weak NT context), which is why 3♠ needn't be forcing, it would be for most Acol pairs I think.

[straube]

I think mike gave you a good answer. 1S-2D, 4S should be a "picture" bid. I haven't seen it used to imply a control in responder's suit but that would be a good agreement to have. I've never played Acol so probably can't be much help to you with this auction.

[pescetom]

straube, on 2023-September-30, 11:50, said:

I think mike gave you a good answer. 1S-2D, 4S should be a "picture" bid. I haven't seen it used to imply a control in responder's suit but that would be a good agreement to have.

I agree with mikeh that it should never be necessary in 2/1, but also with you that by USP it should be a "picture" bid of some kind. All controls in our two suits and none in the other two comes to mind.

[mikeh]

Cyberyeti, on 2023-September-30, 11:38, said:

3♠ isn't even forcing opposite a misfitting 9-10 count for us. 2♦ doesn't promise a rebid, can pass 2♠.

We have a GF not necessarily balanced 2N rebid for the really good hands (weak NT context), which is why 3♠ needn't be forcing, it would be for most Acol pairs I think.

No wonder no top pair plays Acol, lol. Slam bidding is pretty much reduced to being either a slam nobody would miss, playing normal methods, or a guessing game. And, with all due respect, using 2N as an artificial game force strikes me as appalling. You use an entire round of bidding without providing much information to partner while risking wrong-siding notrump. While I recognize (assume) that 2N says that opener isn’t really interested in notrump (at least, on many hands if not all), it’s silly for opener to conclude that notrump is unplayable from partner’s side.

[DavidKok]

Partner was not interesting in hearing anything about our hand. I can't bid on now. If we miss a slam I will have a discussion about jumping (two levels) with strong hands after the session.

I think at least one of 2♠ and 3♠ should be forcing, on general principles. But I do not have experience with this system.

As a minor aside I've been leaning towards opening 4M with minimum opening hands with 8 or good 7 trumps. With that agreement this sequence necessarily shows decent extras (which in turn means it does not exist).

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2023-September-30, 20:04, said:

Partner was not interesting in hearing anything about our hand. I can't bid on now. If we miss a slam I will have a discussion about jumping (two levels) with strong hands after the session.

I think at least one of 2♠ and 3♠ should be forcing, on general principles. But I do not have experience with this system.

As a minor aside I've been leaning towards opening 4M with minimum opening hands with 8 or good 7 trumps. With that agreement this sequence necessarily shows decent extras (which in turn means it does not exist).

4♠ is an informative bid in this sequence. It means if a 4♠ opener is 8 decent spades and out, that you had a little more defence than that, but not necessarily more playing strength. AKJ10xxx, x, x, Kxxx for example where 6N is very decent unless they find the spade lead or similar with ♠AKQ where it's great. If he has the heart king instead of the club king, they probably have to find the club lead.

[Tramticket]

Cyberyeti, on 2023-September-30, 11:38, said:

3♠ isn't even forcing opposite a misfitting 9-10 count for us.

3S would certainly be forcing for us and I believe 99.9% of Acol players. Traditionally it showed a hand with 7 playing tricks (so one trick short of an Acol Two / Benji 2C opening). The combination of responder showing extras (the values for a two-level response) and opener showing extra (the jump), creates a game force.

A 4S re-bid usually shows a hand with an eight-card (0r good seven-card) suit, which was slightly too strong to pre-emp initially.

On the actual hand I bid 5D (a cue bid) and expect partner to bid the slam with a club control.

[Tramticket]

Cyberyeti, on 2023-September-30, 08:13, said:

Dealt in practice, so no vulnerability

Vulnerability does matter. What is a maximum 4S opener at the vulnerability? I am placing partner with a king more than that.

[Cyberyeti]

Tramticket, on 2023-October-01, 00:53, said:

3S would certainly be forcing for us and I believe 99.9% of Acol players. Traditionally it showed a hand with 7 playing tricks (so one trick short of an Acol Two / Benji 2C opening). The combination of responder showing extras (the values for a two-level response) and opener showing extra (the jump), creates a game force.

A 4S re-bid usually shows a hand with an eight-card (0r good seven-card) suit, which was slightly too strong to pre-emp initially.

On the actual hand I bid 5D (a cue bid) and expect partner to bid the slam with a club control.

I agree with you, if you don't have the arrangement that 2N followed by 3♠ shows a GF with 6+ spades, then 3♠ will be forcing, although there are 2/1s that might want to pass a 7 trick 3♠ (x, Ax, xxxx, KQ10xxx for example which might well be waste paper after trick 1), for us it tends to be 6.5 tricks.

[straube]

Cyberyeti, on 2023-October-01, 04:24, said:

I agree with you, if you don't have the arrangement that 2N followed by 3♠ shows a GF with 6+ spades, then 3♠ will be forcing, although there are 2/1s that might want to pass a 7 trick 3♠ (x, Ax, xxxx, KQ10xxx for example which might well be waste paper after trick 1), for us it tends to be 6.5 tricks.

I don't think going through 2N accomplishes the same thing for you as 1S-2D, 3S =spades are trump, good hand, please cue. Your 2N rebid is handling too much.

I also think forcing with x Ax xxxx KQTxxx is so light that it could be causing you problems in your continuations.

[foobar]

Looks like a pass to me. We likely have a ♠ loser, with another one possible in the rounded suits.

[Cyberyeti]

straube, on 2023-October-01, 09:58, said:

I don't think going through 2N accomplishes the same thing for you as 1S-2D, 3S =spades are trump, good hand, please cue. Your 2N rebid is handling too much.

I also think forcing with x Ax xxxx KQTxxx is so light that it could be causing you problems in your continuations.

This is a very standard Acol 2/1 indeed x, Axxx, Jxxx, KQxx would be a pretty routine Acol 2/1.