From: bpwing@phoenix.princeton.edu (Ben Wing)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Date: 6 Sep 92 23:12:42 GMT
Subject: Re: Precision
Organization: Princeton University
X-Subliminal-Message: You can quit reading news anytime you want.

In article <1992Sep6.222750.17967@galois.mit.edu> maboyiny@ccvax.as.edu.tw (Dr. Weird) writes:
|
|> ...  non-1C hands has a narrower range, as commented by many in
|>the net earlier with nearly universal understanding that it is a net gain.
|
|For the _one_of_a_major_ openings, yes.  1M openings are a big gain for
|Precision, but does people understand how often the get to open 1M?  Not
|very often!  >40% of opening bids are one _D_I_A_M_O_N_D_, and another 15%
|or so (depend on the system) one CLUB, and another 20% (depend heavily on
|range) one NO-TRUMP.  I have gone sessions without getting to open 1M
|playing Precision against active opposition.  [My record, set recently in
|Taiwan, was an afternoon in which we opened 17 mini-no-trumps (nine of which
|in a 12-board segment) three strong clubs, and six 1nebulous diamonds in
|36 board segment.  We did not get any other opening bids.]
|

At the Santa Clara regionals I had good results playing a dual-system with
Alan Jaffray -- we played a Precision-ish system non-vul and a 2/1 system
vul.  Despite using 9-14 1M openings (5 cards), we only had 2 or 3 such
openings out of 48 boards; we had our share of 15+ 1C openings, a whole
lot of 10-12 Kamikaze NT openings, maybe 3 or 4 1D openings (1D =
4+ diamonds or 13-14 NT), and a couple 2C openings.  

It seems we benefitted a lot from the Kamikaze NT openings, perhaps
partially because the opponents weren't used to competing over NT.  We
also had a huge gain from using a natural XX of a double of 1NT --
doubler's partner always ran, and 3 out of 4 times the opponents landed in
2 or 3 of some suit, doubled, down two or three, and 3nt by us was probably
not making in any of the cases.

The 2C opening is truly awful; luckily it didn't come up much.  The
"nebulous" 1D opening is not so bad at all the way we play it -- in
competition, assume partner has diamonds, because if not, he's at the
top of his range and can probably afford another bid.  (this is the same
advantage you get from weak NT's, where 1C and 1D openings are either
real [and nearly always 5 cards] or show a stronger hand, and so you can
afford to raise in competition with 3 cards.)

|>On the other hand, if opponent is silent after your 1C, chances are you
|>would land in the optimal contract, especially on those borderline
|>game/slam decisions.

This would certainly be the case if you play a relay system after 1C; if
you don't, my experience is that you need good agreements, as good as
you'd need in a natural system, and a fair amount of experience.

|I would not bet on it if your auction started 1C-2D/2C and you are a new
|partnership playing Precision.  There _ARE_ several ways to handle these
|sequences, but I don't expect a new partnership to be able to handle "those
|borderline game/slam decisions" after this start.
|

Ugh ...  we played 1H and 1S responses to 1C and showing only 4+ (possibly
with a longer minor), so you're better placed in a 1C-2C or 1C-2D sequence.
Of course, this has its own problems (e.g. 1C-1H-1S-2C opener doesn't know
at this point which of responder's two suits is longer), but you get to 4-4
fits easier.

|>with my regular partners, I always insist on real (4+) D suit, at least in
|>1st or 2nd seat.
|
|Which means that you are playing a 12/13-15 no-trump and start just about
|every hand 16+ with 1C.  Fine.  You will suffer other problems, most
|notably in the 2C department.

We considered 5422 hands with 5 clubs to be balanced in most cases, so
the 2C opening usually promises 6 clubs or an unbalanced hand.

|>2D opening (4414 or better, D short) in its original form is probably a
|>waste, if not a joke...
|
|Au contraire-- it was about the only legal thing that will fit in to patch
|the system in those days.  It was one of necessity.  Even nowadays I can't
|really see a much better usage if you gravitate toward Meckwell-type
|constructs (6 card clubs, intermediate no-trump).  They of course play the
|theoretically correct two HEARTS to show 3415/4314/4414/4405.

Did C.C. Wei really choose the 2D opening just to fit the ACBL's silly
restrictions?  This I find hard to believe.  It seems to me it's just there
so that otherwise-problematic hands don't mess up the structure.  Bo-Yin
(or anyone else), do you know of people who played a Precision system with
mini-Roman 2D (i.e. 4441 singleton anywhere), and what sort of luck they had?
(BTW in our system we used 2D as an undisciplined diamond pre-empt, and if
4414 hands ever came up, which they didn't, we would open 1H or something,
and hope we don't get in a 2H contract on a 4-3 fit and get tapped in
diamonds).


ben
--

Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.