Conventions

Home

M J Bridge

Bidding

Hands

Theory

Beginner and above

Your suit is a minor


In traditional Acol an opening bid of four of a minor was game-invitational.

Partner would either pass or raise.


I am not convinced by this interpretation.  At the very least partner’s choice will have to be based on something less than science.


Presumably this is a hand with no hopes of a slam, and with few prospects of making a contract in no trumps.  It is therefore - to an extent at least - preemptive.

And is a bid of four of a minor really going to stop an experienced opponent bidding four of his major with anything like a suitable holding?

True, they might well be forced to make a guess, and they will get it wrong some of the time, but that is the argument for a preemptive opening bid rather an invitational bid.


The logic of this is that the bid should be played purely as preemptive - at least it is more preemptive than an opening at the three-level.

And if partner is not being invited to bid a making game how should he respond?  Quite simply, he should increase the preemptive effect based purely on trump length - not in general on the prospect of making a game contract.

9

T 7

K Q T 9 7 5 3 2

6 4

With the agreement above open this hand 4, although this would not be my choice.


My own view is that the bid in the example above will not deter your opponents in a good quality game.

Personally I would open 5 on the hand above when not vulnerable, and possibly when both vulnerable.  

See ‘opening at the five-level’.


The alternative is to use these bids artificially, perhaps as the ‘Namyats’ convention.

Responder’s continuations

Context  -  Opening four of a suit.