Which bidding system is dominant?
#1
Posted 2016-November-13, 16:22
In particular, within the 5 card major family, how many are playing 2/1 versus SAYC versus other, at any level (world, BBO, US, Europe, Asia or whatever).
My impression is that 2/1 is rapidly advancing over every alternative and I am curious to know if there is evidence to confirm/deny this.
Does anyone have any data or links to useful studies?
Or at least informed judgement on their own country?
#2
Posted 2016-November-13, 16:45
pescetom, on 2016-November-13, 16:22, said:
In particular, within the 5 card major family, how many are playing 2/1 versus SAYC versus other, at any level (world, BBO, US, Europe, Asia or whatever).
My impression is that 2/1 is rapidly advancing over every alternative and I am curious to know if there is evidence to confirm/deny this.
Does anyone have any data or links to useful studies?
Or at least informed judgement on their own country?
There is still a lot of dependance on where you're from. In the US:
1. At the level of tournament players, 2/1 is by far the most common general approach.
2. Among top experts, 2/1 is probably still most common, but strong club systems (usually based on Meckwell) have a very strong following and are well-represented on our national teams.
3. Among weaker club-level players, you still see a fair amount of "standard american" (it's not really SAYC, almost no one plays SAYC); I think 2/1 is still the majority in open club games though.
From my limited experience of other countries:
1. A basic form of precision is very common in China; almost every Chinese pair in Sanya had this approach.
2. Polish club is common in Poland, although some of the top experts have moved to other things.
3. Top French pairs seem to all stick close to French standard (I think it's 2/1 except suit rebid with both 2m openings strong).
4. I'm sure there are still many Acol players in England, but the English internationalists I've encountered usually play 2/1.
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#3
Posted 2016-November-13, 16:45
2/1 is too complicated (meaning it has too many artificial bids) for the average tournament player in my area.
#4
Posted 2016-November-13, 17:29
akwoo, on 2016-November-13, 16:45, said:
2/1 is too complicated (meaning it has too many artificial bids) for the average tournament player in my area.
What area do you play? 2/1 is the predominant tournament system in the US and I seriously doubt that the average US player is better than the average player in other countries. As far as artificial gadgets go, you don't really need to play more of them in a 2/1 context.
#5
Posted 2016-November-13, 19:12
johnu, on 2016-November-13, 17:29, said:
US - inland Northwest. Maybe 60% can handle Jacoby 2N - less than half want to handle 1N forcing. Forget about Lebensohl.
The truth is that, once you get out of major urban areas, the standard of bridge is quite low.
#6
Posted 2016-November-14, 01:45
#7
Posted 2016-November-14, 04:42
The Swedish standard system is a natural system with four card majors/minors (with 4-4 you typically open in the order hearts, clubs, spades, diamonds) and strong NT (15-17), weak twos and strong 2C/2NT. 2/1 can be invitational, so not GF. Strong jump shifts.
Now many people play this framework, but instead play 2/1 as GF, and perhaps weak jump shifts, and maybe 2D multi and other choices for the two-level openings.
Five card majors is common too, especially at higher levels of play. Most still play strong NT. I'd say at higher levels that almost everyone plays 2/1 as GF, or maybe "GF unless responder rebids his suit". In my experience, 5533 (American standard, five card majors and three card minors) is pretty uncommon, instead most play 5542 instead (short club). Some play transfer responses to 1C, but not the average club player. In Denmark the standard is 5443 (spades promise five, but hearts may be four), and we have one pair at our club playing that style.
Strong club is not uncommon, and usually combined with five card majors, strong NT and nebulous diamond. Playing 2C as 6+C and 2D as three-suiter (as in American precision) is very uncommon. Instead 2C as 5+C and 2D as some sort of preemptive bid is more common (so opening 1D can be 4-4-1-4). Some play strong club combined with four card majors, then basically Swedish standard adopted to a strong club format. I'd say that 2/1 as GF is the norm in these strong club systems too. At high levels strong club, five card majors and both 2C and 2D as natural has reached good results, so some pairs play that. Then 1D is "weak NT or unbalanced with a four card major and longer minor".
I rarely play against weak NT or mini NT, but some players play that. It can be combined with strong club, or natural four/five card majors.
Sweden's system rules are very liberal, but "weird" systems are rare. "Swedish Club" is a system where 1C is either a weak NT or a strong hand (similar to Polish Club, but intermediate hands with clubs is excluded). That system was popular at higher levels some decades ago, but is now rare (even though I play it myself). Forcing pass systems have also been played at higher levels, but are very uncommon.
Regarding 2/1 as GF or not, a modern trend seem to be to use 2C as a GF relay: some use it as clubs or balanced, while others bid it with various GF hands. I think this will become even more common, especially at higher levels, and perhaps as a result other 2/1 bids will become artificial.
#8
Posted 2016-November-14, 05:04
If you tell opps that you don't play Acol they think it means that you don't play bridge.
#9
Posted 2016-November-14, 10:25
#10
Posted 2016-November-14, 10:59
I used to live in the Middle East, amongst other places, and played in clubs where players came from all over. They all played simple systems based on 15-17 and 5card majors. My partner and I played very simple Acol (apart from multi), not even using negative doubles. I had to regularly explain that although we played four card majors if we opened 1S or 1H it could sometimes actually be more than four.
The club where I played in Kuwait is probably unique in being the nay bridge club in the world with a prayer room. I was tempted to use it on one or two occasions when dummy went down.
#11
Posted 2016-November-14, 11:28
#13
Posted 2016-November-14, 13:15
#14
Posted 2016-November-14, 23:28
#15
Posted 2016-November-15, 03:47
msjennifer, on 2016-November-14, 13:15, said:
Yes that is my impression also, in Mumbai and Pune most played Bombay Club.
#16
Posted 2016-November-15, 04:15
- System regulation. If sponsors have a problem with a convention, then regulators ban it or impose severe restrictions on it. Hence, it's unlikely to become popular (e.g. encrypted signals, forcing pass). At the other extreme, If regulators or their friends want to play a convention, then they relax relevant disclosure rules and prevent effective defence to it. e.g. in the ACBL jurisdiction, we're told that the 2/1 short-club on a 2-card suit has been redefined as "natural"! it no longer requires an alert; and artificial defences to it are banned or restricted.
- On-line play. Pick-up partners from different countries like to have default agreements. For example, BBO players have standardised and popularised 2/1.
#17
Posted 2016-November-15, 07:43
nige1, on 2016-November-15, 04:15, said:
- System regulation. If regulators ban a convention or impose severe restrictions on it, then it is unlikely to become popular (e.g. encrypted signals, forcing pass). At the other extreme, If regulators or their friends want to play a convention, then they can relax relevant disclosure rules and handicap effective defence to it. e.g. in ACBL jurisdictions, we're told that the 2/1 short-club on a 2-card suit has been redefined as "natural"! it no longer requires an alert; and artificial defences to it are banned or restricted.
- On-line play. Pick-up partners from different countries like to have default agreements. For example, BBO has standardised and popularised 2/1.
Agreed nige1. I have no specific evidence for this other than my own experience, but suspect that if face-to-face bridge is declining in the UK or USA, one of the major reasons is the stifling attitude of the Bridge authorities there towards any systems or conventions that are outside their own narrow comfort zone. Similarly, online Bridge is demonstrably growing. On BBO you can play pretty much any system and carding you like unless you decide to subject yourself to an ACBL tourney. Moreover the facilities on BBO are second to none for anyone wanting to develop or experiment with new bidding methods or gadgets
Oliver
#18
Posted 2016-November-15, 08:12
awm, on 2016-November-13, 16:45, said:
helene_t, on 2016-November-14, 05:04, said:
msjennifer, on 2016-November-14, 23:28, said:
OliverC, on 2016-November-15, 07:43, said:
OK. I can't speak for everyone of course, and I fully understand that people posting on forums can be a bit patronising - but remember this. Bridge at the social level (which is how I - and possibly millions of others - play it) wouldn't survive if it weren't for the 'older' contingent. Indeed I've partnered someone who was 101 years old - and still a decent player! We are the generation who have got time to indulge ourselves in the game. And if we're slow to learn 'new tricks', you'll have to forgive us!
If bridge at the cut-throat, competitive level is 'declining' in its face-to-face form, well that's obviously sad for those who follow that scene. I can assure folks, there are plenty of local, friendly clubs around my way - and some of them have a waiting list!
#19
Posted 2016-November-15, 09:11
nige1, on 2016-November-15, 04:15, said:
Are you talking about opening 1♣ with a 2-card suit? It's only considered natural if you only do it with exactly 4=4=3=2 shape. It still requires a "could be short" announcement. I've never heard that this is considered part of the 2/1 system (very few of the 2/1 players I know use it), it's just something some players tack onto whatever system they're playing.
Or are you talking about opener rebidding 2♣ after a forcing NT with 4-5=2=2 shape? That's just a necessary evil unless you play Flannery.