[FrancesHinden]

Three of the things that make Acol Acol are 4-card majors, limit bidding and light 2/1s. A fourth is strong twos, although personally I think you can play Acol without playing strong twos but I don't think you can abandon the other things. NT strength can be whatever you agree it to be (originally Acol was a strong NT, then a variable NT).

In one partnership our system doesn't have a name, the top of the card just says "5-card majors, Acol-style 2/1s"

[gordontd]

AlexJonson, on 2011-February-12, 17:10, said:

If 2/1 promises a rebid, what should the 'Acol' player call their system.

I'll leave it for them to decide - as I said, I've never met such a player.

The whole "2/1 promises a rebid" concept is in my mind a standard American thing, though there may be other strong NT systems that define their 2/1s the same way.

[Cyberyeti]

Had an incident this weekend where opponents had on their card "reverse benji", so they opened 2♣. Partner bid 2♠, I looked at the "system description" on their card and gave the explanation as for the brand of randomness we play over strong bids, had a pile with a 6 card suit, bid 3♣, played there and then discovered that what they actually played was that 2♣ was strong, or a weak 2 in diamonds, prominently on the front of the convention card under "bits of system opps should note" but under the bidding box as I looked at it.

I said "That's not reverse Benji then, so don't call it that". Opinions ?

[mjj29]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-February-14, 10:11, said:

Had an incident this weekend where opponents had on their card "reverse benji", so they opened 2♣. Partner bid 2♠, I looked at the "system description" on their card and gave the explanation as for the brand of randomness we play over strong bids, had a pile with a 6 card suit, bid 3♣, played there and then discovered that what they actually played was that 2♣ was strong, or a weak 2 in diamonds, prominently on the front of the convention card under "bits of system opps should note" but under the bidding box as I looked at it.

I said "That's not reverse Benji then, so don't call it that". Opinions ?

I would certainly consider that MI, the rest of the card not withstanding. What did they have under the "2C opening bid" line on the front of the card (which is the correct place for this), or wasn't it an EBU 20B card?

Matt

[RMB1]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-February-14, 10:11, said:

I said "That's not reverse Benji then, so don't call it that". Opinions ?

Misinformation, what ever the rest of the card says.

[pompous]
Telling opponents what to do tends to get their backs up and TD's start reaching for their orange DP forms.

Better would be:
"That's not reverse Benji then, we'd better have the TD."
TD "What seems to be the problem"
"They opened 2C = strong or weak with diamonds, but their card says reverse Benji"
TD "Does it give the correct explanation on the card"
"Yes, but the top of the card says reverse Benji"
TD "OK that is misinformation, I will consider if you have been damaged"
TD to opponents "That's not reverse Benji: so don't call it that"
[/pompous]

[Cyberyeti]

Was at a match played privately so no TD, and I was a bit more polite than that, but can't remember the exact phrasing.

I think the opps were embarrassed, because they could certainly have done my partner for his pass of 3♣ (which is nat/F over his natural 2♠ overcall). Would have ended up as a directorial mess. Will post this in separate thread as is actually mildly interesting.