Acol Daylong - Feedback thread Feedback and comments on argine and the acol system it plays
#21
Posted 2022-December-07, 09:32
#22
Posted 2022-December-07, 11:48
helene_t, on 2022-December-07, 09:32, said:
I continue to suspect we are playing invented Acol
I now have a less ancient and more specific Acol textbook ("Guide to better Acol bridge" by Ron Klinger, 1988) so I can check out just how many of these conventions were part of original Acol, if anyone is interested.
Of course systems continue to evolve until they become extinct or unrecognisable, but at least a name like "Modern Acol" might be appropriate.
#23
Posted 2022-December-07, 14:39
pescetom, on 2022-December-07, 11:48, said:
I now have a less ancient and more specific Acol textbook ("Guide to better Acol bridge" by Ron Klinger, 1988) so I can check out just how many of these conventions were part of original Acol, if anyone is interested.
Of course systems continue to evolve until they become extinct or unrecognisable, but at least a name like "Modern Acol" might be appropriate.
What, if any, features are at the core of 'Acol'.
Is it possible to state say ~three elements that would cause someone to say "Ah, you play Acol"?
#24
Posted 2022-December-07, 15:40
pilowsky, on 2022-December-07, 14:39, said:
Is it possible to state say ~three elements that would cause someone to say "Ah, you play Acol"?
Not my system, but it was the first I was exposed to, albeit briefly and with little interest at the time.
But FWIW I would reply 4 card majors, weak NT, natural developments.
#26
Posted 2022-December-08, 00:58
pilowsky, on 2022-December-07, 14:39, said:
Is it possible to state say ~three elements that would cause someone to say "Ah, you play Acol"?
I was brought up on very basic Acol. Not much to it from memory
Weak (maybe variable) NT, strong 2s (later superseded by weak), 4 card majors. Bid your longest and best suit perhaps. Bid sensibly. Nice clear NT ranges all through. Clear limit bids in suits too. I seem to recall. Very simple, clear and quite logical from memory
I think people used to throw in a few other conventions like strong 2C, transfers, Stayman and Blackwood. That's about it
#27
Posted 2022-December-08, 05:06
pilowsky, on 2022-December-07, 14:39, said:
Is it possible to state say ~three elements that would cause someone to say "Ah, you play Acol"?
2 level shifts have a low forcing character, similar to a 2 level freebid in other systems.
1h can be 4, probably 1s too.
Not many conventions.
#28
Posted 2022-December-08, 09:06
Just looking at some of the gadgets that have been expected or mentioned as Acol in these threads:
- negative doubles: are advised as an option and explained, but "standard" is penalty/balance of HCP
- 4th suit forcing to game: no, responder can pass a minimum rebid
- Inverted minors: no, 1m-2m shows 6-9
- 1M-2NT GF with fit: no, natural NF 11-12.
- Splinters: not mentioned.
Sure, this is a book from 34 years ago and things change. But Acol was already long in the tooth in 1988, and some of these things really seem to contradict the nature and basis of the system.
#29
Posted 2022-December-08, 15:22
Maybe its my limitations or peculiarities of certain systems we use from time to time but with Gib 2/1 there have been times close to 5 or 6 level and I still didn't have a clue
#30
Posted 2022-December-08, 17:54
thepossum, on 2022-December-08, 15:22, said:
Maybe its my limitations or peculiarities of certain systems we use from time to time but with Gib 2/1 there have been times close to 5 or 6 level and I still didn't have a clue
Strong/5 can be a bit of a walk in the desert, like when it goes
1♣-1♥
1♠-2♦
2♥
and you still don't know if opener has a balanced or unbalanced hand. In a weak NT system, most of the time you will know from the first rebid.
The GIB system also has an annoying feature, namely the catch-all 2M rebid.
Acol is maybe a bit better, but often responder will have to make up a new suit at their second turn because for example
1M-2m
2M-3m
is nonforcing, so you don't always know if a bid is natural or it is a fake suit which partner had to bid to do something forcing.
#31
Posted 2022-December-09, 19:14
#32
Posted 2022-December-12, 09:22
Me Argine
1♠ 2♦
4♦ Pass
Argine describes 4♦ as "4-6 diamonds, 4+ spades, 14-20 hcp natural game forcing", then passes it
#33
Posted 2022-December-12, 11:22
Douglas43, on 2022-December-12, 09:22, said:
Me Argine
1♠ 2♦
4♦ Pass
Argine describes 4♦ as "4-6 diamonds, 4+ spades, 14-20 hcp natural game forcing", then passes it
This is a game force for Ron Klinger and even early Terence Reese, although not promising spades support.
#35
Posted 2022-December-13, 04:07
pilowsky, on 2022-December-12, 18:13, said:
The hover info says 7+ HCPs. In reality it may promise a bit more
It's not an unreasonable bid, maybe you could have kicked it in with all those prime cards but it's always easier with open cards.
#36
Posted 2022-December-13, 04:51
#37
Posted 2022-December-13, 13:10
This forcing / non-forcing thing seems to be a recurring theme with Argine.
After I show a minimum opener with diamond 'support' (except this is the funny 1+ diamond description again), Argine bids 3♣ with a flat 10 count.. forcing. I have no bids that match my hand, so I try 3♦ even though that promises a 5th diamond. Nope, Argine insists on clubs, now showing 16+ points, and again forcing. I give in and raise to game, only for Argine to suddenly decide it prefers diamonds after all Well, they were both down anyway - I expect Argine would have passed out the 'forcing' 3♣.
Twice Argine forgot that 'the 5 level belongs to the opponents' - feels like this is something I could exploit more:
Both myself and East were willing to pass out 2♣.. but after I make a gamble with 5♣, I'm saved by an interesting 5♠ bid.
And same again here, except this time they went down 3.
And lastly, another splinter that could have gone better. I don't know why Argine has inherited GIB's annoying habit of bypassing cuebids with 'minimums', however you define minimum. My splinter did 'show' 4 spades, though it's so hard to find forcing bids in ACOL.
#39
Posted 2022-December-17, 18:33
What do you bid here?
Some may have started with a 2♥ double negative. Argine doesn't play that.
GIB would have continued with 3♣, cheaper minor, which while OK here, is one of the most broken definitions in the GIB database (since it bids it when having a natural club bid too, and as a result is one of the most commonly reported bugs). No other robot could be as bad as that. But Argine doesn't play that either.
Argine..
#40
Posted 2022-December-21, 18:18
A silly 1NT by me, I know. But when East held a nice 9 count opposite a reverse, it decided to bid an artificial, forcing, weak, 2NT. Maybe its system says you can show this hand type by starting with a forcing 2NT, then correcting to 3NT.. but we'll never know, since West passed! Forcing, not forcing strikes again.
The second was after West, a thrice passed hand, decided to bizarrely balance with 2C in the type of auction you're always taught not to balance in. But this was outdone by East, who felt their misfitting 9 count was worth a 2NT invite.
Learning Acol is fun.
Can someone help explain 5♥ in this auction?