[eagles123]

I have seen a few players on BBO with the following in their convention card:


"Acol 5 card majors 15-17 NT"


this tends to be from Dutch players. Where does Acol fit in - 5 card major and strong NT seem to be the total opposite of Acol?


Cheers

Eagles

[Cyberyeti]

What I thought of as Dutch Acol was 4 card heart, 5 card spade, which I have friends that play, the only real difference is that 4333s are opened 1♣. Acol has been played with a strong no trump for years, it's what I was taught 40 years ago and rapidly gave up.

[wank]

acol with a strong no trump is much better imo. the only top class pairs to have played acol in recent memory did so with a strong NT. this has the advantage that you can open 1M frequently as a pre-empt on your minimum openers. it's particularly joyful when you pick off their 4M contract by opening the suit.

[nige1]

Eric Crowhurst, Acol high priest, recommended a variable notrump, 12-14 or 15-17, depending on vulnerability.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

Acol plays a 2 over 1 response as round forcing only. In fact lots of sequences in Acol
are explicitly NF.
This is much more central to Acol, than the fact, that you are allowed to open 4 card majors,
or that you happen to play weak NT.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

Dutch Acol branched off from English Acol at a time when strong no-trump was still common among Acol players at least when vulnerable, maybe more like 16-18 but 15-17 is not that big a modification. 5-card majors is not what you are supposed to play if you call your system "Acol" but given that modern textbooks teach lowest-of-two-fourcard suits, it is a natural evolution to define 1♠ as 5, and then obviously some like to define 1♥ as 5 also for consistency. Actually there is an "Acol w 5cM" CC on the NBB site so the strange nomenclature is apparently official.

To most Dutch people "Acol" simply means that you don't play Precision. They might call the TD accusing you of MI if you call your system Acol and then open a weak NT, or open 1M holding a 4M4m hand, but such systems are played almost only by tourists. And the rare Dutch pair playing English Acol probably wouldn't call their system Acol.

The forcing character of 2/1 auctions is quite similar in novice-style Biedemeijer to novice-style English Acol, despite the different notrump range.

If it was baptized recently it might have been called Dutch SA rather than Dutch Acol. You can call it Biedermeijer but that usually refers to a very specific style that seperates it from the Berry Westra system. Besides it is difficult to spell.

I think the main reason why it is called Acol rather than Goren is that jump raises are limit bids in Acol while forcing in Goren.

[gordontd]

helene_t, on 2013-July-01, 04:16, said:

I think the main reason why it is called Acol rather than Goren is that jump raises are limit bids in Acol while forcing in Goren.

Yes, the widespread use of limit bids including NT responses, later adopted by Std Am players, was one of the significant features of Acol.

[Zelandakh]

The first version of Acol I learned was 5 card majors and a 16-18 NT. The original Acol used a 12-14 NT when not vulnerable and a 15-17 NT when vulnerable. The fundamental and central concept within Acol is "approach-forcing" in combination with many non-forcing bids. It is an open question as to what you can change and still reasonably call a system Acol. But 5 card majors with a strong NT have a long enough tradition definitely to be over the line. That said, I would forget Dutch Acol within the Acol family completely. If you get a Dutch partner in the Acol club, it is sometimes a good idea to check what they play. If their system is Dutch Acol, you may as well go to a different table if you want a simple Acol game.