[helene_t]

I am not sure why 1c-1d is explained as natural or club support. We do play invented minors, don't we?

[pescetom]

helene_t, on 2022-December-07, 09:32, said:

I am not sure why 1c-1d is explained as natural or club support. We do play invented minors, don't we?

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.

[pilowsky]

pescetom, on 2022-December-07, 11:48, 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.

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"?

[pescetom]

pilowsky, on 2022-December-07, 14:39, said:

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"?

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.

[thepossum]

pescetom, on 2022-December-07, 11:48, said:

I continue to suspect we are playing invented Acol

I put one of Argine's much discussed hands in QPlus-Advanced Acol and it bid exactly the same, except that it bid game and didn't pass my 3S

So maybe it isn't Acol

[thepossum]

pilowsky, on 2022-December-07, 14:39, said:

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"?

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Weak (maybe variable) NT, strong 2s (later superseded by weak), 4 card majors.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

[helene_t]

pilowsky, on 2022-December-07, 14:39, said:

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"?

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.

[pescetom]

I had a quick skim through Ron Klinger's book, which was the family bridge bible when I first encountered Acol (and like the other Bible, more revered than read).

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.

[thepossum]

I don't know if this is an accurate perception but with Acol you generally have a clear idea of where you heading by round 2 of the bidding by the latest

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

[helene_t]

thepossum, on 2022-December-08, 15:22, said:

I don't know if this is an accurate perception but with Acol you generally have a clear idea of where you heading by round 2 of the bidding by the latest

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.

[smerriman]

helene_t, on 2022-December-07, 09:32, said:

I am not sure why 1c-1d is explained as natural or club support. We do play invented minors, don't we?

Nope. 1♣ - 2♣ for Argine is 5+♣, 5-10 HCP.

[Douglas43]

Bug today I'm afraid in Board 3 of the free Acol Individual daylong, first real bug in the otherwise very good Argine bot:

Me Argine
1♠ 2♦
4♦ Pass

Argine describes 4♦ as "4-6 diamonds, 4+ spades, 14-20 hcp natural game forcing", then passes it

[pescetom]

Douglas43, on 2022-December-12, 09:22, said:

Bug today I'm afraid in Board 3 of the free Acol Individual daylong, first real bug in the otherwise very good Argine bot:

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.

[pilowsky]

Learning Acol is fun.
Can someone help explain 5♥ in this auction?

---

[helene_t]

pilowsky, on 2022-December-12, 18:13, said:

Can someone help explain 5♥ in this auction?[/hv]

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.

[pescetom]

I would take it as 'bid 6 with a maximum for what you promised so far' : which with all those controls you pretty much have.

[smerriman]

Four interesting hands in a single tournament.

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.

[Douglas43]

pescetom, on 2022-December-12, 11:22, said:

This is a game force for Ron Klinger and even early Terence Reese, although not promising spades support.

Yes, I agree with the description, it's the pass of a game forcing bid I'm disappointed by

[smerriman]

---

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..

Spoiler

I was wrong; Argine is worse. It bids 3NT, showing 7- HCP and no fit. Full hand (I had a lucky enough hand to make).

[smerriman]

Argine reached two *very* silly 2NT contracts in the last tournament.

---

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.