[awm]

What do you see as the worst thing about fairly "standard" precision methods (i.e. something close to Wei precision)?

[jdonn]

Having played a lot of precision, I think the part about having a hard time finding minor suit fits is the worst thing, and I don't think it's close. In constructive auctions the disadvantage is largely offset since it can often gain as well by making the lead/defense difficult, but in competitive auctions it is a huge loss.

My results have tended to be very good when I open 1♣ and the opponents interfere. They have gifted me numbers left and right, often when I can't even make anything. In theory it should be a disadvantage, but in practice it has more often been an advantage for me since people bid on such awful hands.

[SlickRicky]

Hi,

Competitive auctions can be extremely difficult after the 1D opener, even with good methods. That is the biggest downside of precision to me.

Ricky

[gwnn]

Double partscore swings after 1♦

[Mbodell]

I put other for the part score auctions (not always minors). I find that if we end up in game or slam or in opponents jacking a preempt in we do ok to good. When we play after 1♦ or 1♣-1♦ in a part score we aren't always in the right part score. (1NT= versus 2m+1 or 1NT+1 versus 2M+1).

[akhare]

I like to play 1♦ = 4+ in an unbalanced hand.

It has worked out pretty well so far in conjunction with a 11-14 NT...

[NickRW]

If you want a relatively natural, fairly easy to learn system for playing IMPs then I think Precision is one of your best options. For playing MP, then I think the "Hard to deal with hands including 5C+4M" is the worst of the features listed - too many times you will either have to pass as responder and miss out on that important major fit - or risk trying to find it only to end in 3C or something 1 off. This isn't a big problem at IMP scoring but can be quite a significant source of lost match points.

Of your other points:
Bad results when we open 1C and opponents bid over it

You should hone your methods over 1C and interference - I didn't find this a huge problem. Or switch to Polish or some other two way club system that is a little less pre-emptable maybe.


Hard to find minor fits because 1D shows only 2+

Well, true if you play it that way. Personally I prefer a (12)13-15NT and pass balanced 11s and indifferent 12s lacking 4 diamonds. By far the lesser of 2 evils in my opinion - I don't even regard passing these hands as much of a disadvantage at all.

If partner wants to play 14-16NT then you end up with a wide ranging NT or have to open 1D on 2 or 3 sometimes - that is a problem as far as I am concerned and a serious one in my view.


Precision 2D opening wastes a useful preempt

Well yeah - true - it would be nice to use 2D as something more useful (frequent). However this isn't a show stopper.


Notrump range of either 13-15 or 14-16 is a bad range

Well - simply no. There is nothing particularly bad about any vaguely sensible NT range in and of itself. Personally I don't like 14-16 in a Precision context because I want 1D to be a properly natural bid.


Five card majors don't let you open 1M enough

Well - rejig the system to work with 4 card majors (or maybe just 5 card spades) if you don't like 5 card majors. Arguably it wouldn't be Precision then - but still a workable system.


Not enough Gerber

You're inviting sarcasm?! Enough said!


Personally I don't think you've really touched on the worst point in basic (Wei) style Precision - certainly for MP. This is the limited nature of most of the openers. They are a little too limited. Gives a lot of info away to opps immediately in the auction that helps them compete.

Following on the from above is the recommendation to only respond with an 8 count. This means you don't raise or respond with a lot of 6 and 7 counts - again this lets in 4th seat for an easy re-opener if they feel inclined.

Nick

[skjaeran]

I've not played a strong club system for 17 years. But that wasn't precision - we used the same opening bids as Power Precision. (Our 1♦ opening could be 4405.)

The 2♣ opening in standard precision is what I like the least in the system.

[helene_t]

Playing the original Wei with the modification that (41)35 is 1♦ and (43)15 is 2♦, the biggest problem is the lack of notrump ranges. Pass with 12 and jump to 2NT after 1♣-1♦ with 19 often leads to bad results. If playing 1♥ as an artificial rebid the latter could presumably be solved but I have almost zero experience with that.

Playing 1♦ as 0+ loses the diamond fit. I don't think this is compensated for by freeing up the 2♦ opening and also I don't care much whether a balanced 11-12 is a nebulous minor suit opening or a pass. But I am probably wrong since most experts play nebulous diamond.

This said, by far the biggest disadvantage is lack of standardization. I can specify a dialect of Acol, WJ, SA or SEF with a couple of chat lines and we will have a common understanding of the most frequent auctions. Agreeing on a dialect of Precision takes much more work.

[cherdano]

helene_t, on Sep 26 2008, 03:22 AM, said:

This said, by far the biggest disadvantage is lack of standardization. I can specify a dialect of Acol, WJ, SA or SEF with a couple of chat lines and we will have a common understanding of the most frequent auctions. Agreeing on a dialect of Precision takes much more work.

Just for curiosity: Why doesn't "Let's play Wei Precision" work?

[mycroft]

The worst thing about playing Precision, by far, is finding opponents that don't bail as soon as you open anything weird/gripe when you don't (in an ACBL tournament, so 100% following regulations) Alert 1M/complain about how long it takes to bid a 7-round 7C (never mind that not only is it a trick 1 or 2 claimer, you can guarantee it from the auction).

In the system? I would say that the random results you get from "wrong-siding" standard contracts because of the different openings (even if more often than not, "wrong-siding" means that the stronger hand's declarer - sure, many times it's worth an extra trick, or even the contract, but when just-by-luck your opening leader has a natural killing lead that would be almost impossible to find from the other hand...) can be a real killer. The justification that "in the long run, we're right" just doesn't seem to help.

[Free]

Handling the part score battle after opening 1♦ is imo the biggest problem.

[helene_t]

cherdano, on Sep 26 2008, 05:58 PM, said:

helene_t, on Sep 26 2008, 03:22 AM, said:

This said, by far the biggest disadvantage is lack of standardization. I can specify a dialect of Acol, WJ, SA or SEF with a couple of chat lines and we will have a common understanding of the most frequent auctions. Agreeing on a dialect of Precision takes much more work.

Just for curiosity: Why doesn't "Let's play Wei Precision" work?

The original Wei Precision had two-way Stayman and negative freebids after 1♣ with an artificial GF 1NT freebid. Nobody play that anymore. And many seem to assume 1♦=2+ as in Wei/Goren.

[Tcyk]

I wonder why Precision is in an non-natural system discussion. I can't imagine anything being more natural. The 1C opening is little more artificial than a 1NT opening bid. Unnatural to me seems to be the multitude of gyrations created to handle opening bids whose strength varies from 12 to 21 HCP.

Yes, the 1D opening in Precision can present problems but the problems exist for the defenders as well as the openers. I usually consider 1D opening as searching for a 4-4 major-suit fit and bid accordingly. Partner can rebid diamonds if he has a real diamond suit. I tend to believe that the 11 to 12 HCP balanced hands should be passed in first or second position. This is certainly in agreement with Edgar Kaplan and the Kaplan-Sheinwold system.

When you add complex-diamond or changes that would qualify the system as super precision, then I agree, the system becomes somewhat artificial. Asking bids in themselves are not artificial but perhaps you consider Stayman as artificial like Bergen, Jacoby transfers, Jacoby 2NT, takeout doubles, Blackwood, Gerber, ... the list goes on and on.

[NickRW]

Tcyk, on Oct 3 2008, 01:14 AM, said:

I wonder why Precision is in an non-natural system discussion...

You're right, basic Precision is certainly a quite natural system. Around here "non natural" seems to mean not some form of SA - even Acol is a "non natural" system. It's just a reflection of the primarily North American population on these message boards and the degree to which SA has become an online standard.

Nick

[Apollo81]

Of all of those categories, the only system losses I see on a consistent basis are (1) from opponents interfering over strong club (2) the increased difficulty of finding minor fits in competitive auctions after 1♦ and (3) losses from opening 14 point notrumps. As Josh mentioned, (1) also provides a lot of system wins. (3) also provides a lot of system wins.

With (2), the biggest problem seems to be when opponents overcall 1NT. At least in Standard when this happens responder can pretty much tell when he should be competing in opener's minor and when he shouldn't (mostly in auctions where opener's RHO Staymans or Transfers after 1NT). In Precision no one knows each others minor distribution (or in Transfer auctions whether the opps have 7, 8, or 9 cards there) so it is really difficult to make competitive decisions there. For instance give responder a 2245 7-count red/red at IMPs. The bidding goes 1d-(1n)-p-(2h)-p-(2s)-?. Do you bid?

I don't think most other auctions are that big a problem, at least if you've discussed your bidding in detail. It's important to play something like 1♦-3♣ = "I would have made a 3-level preemptive raise of whatever minor you opened" so that you don't also lose on those hands. You can even play that in competition.

[benlessard]

What i dont like about precision and my solution to it.


1C for 16+, lead that you dont open 1C often enough.
(I strongly suggest to play 15+)


1D-- That show only 2.
(You can play that 1D show 4 and is unbalanced and im pretty sure its the way to go)


The 15-21 pts hands with D. I find that it akward to open those 1C.
(I open them 1D, IMO much better to have 1D as 11-21 than 11-15)


the 18-19 balanced hand.
(I open 1 club and rebid 2D to show this balanced hand, partner will be able to signoff in 2D,2S,3C wich is a lot better than if i rebid 2Nt.)


The 2D opening. I think roman is a lot inferior to the weak 2s.
(the 4414 hand is opened 1H,1S or 1Nt depending on the quality of the suits.)


The 5C+4M hands
(My solution to this is that the old school responses are obsolete. With a proper structures of responses 2C isnt a big problem.)


Opponents interferring over 1C.
(We open 1C with GF hands or 15-17 with a 5M or 16+ clubs or balanced, so that 18-22 with 5M we open them 1M.) This lead to less problem for intervention, but the cost is no LOB.


NT range
(we play wide ranging Nt with structure that is geared for invitationnal hands. White we play 10-14 and 1C-1Nt is 15-18, 1C-2D is 19-20 ,1C--2H is 21-22 etc.

Red its 12-15/16-19/20-21/22-23 etc.

[effervesce]

benlessard, on Oct 17 2008, 01:19 AM, said:

What i dont like about precision and my solution to it.


1C for 16+, lead that you dont open 1C often enough.
(I strongly suggest to play 15+)


1D-- That show only 2.
(You can play that 1D show 4 and is unbalanced and im pretty sure its the way to go)


The 15-21 pts hands with D. I find that it akward to open those 1C.
(I open them 1D, IMO much better to have 1D as 11-21 than 11-15)


the 18-19 balanced hand.
(I open 1 club and rebid 2D to show this balanced hand, partner will be able to signoff in 2D,2S,3C wich is a lot better than if i rebid 2Nt.)


The 2D opening. I think roman is a lot inferior to the weak 2s.
(the 4414 hand is opened 1H,1S or 1Nt depending on the quality of the suits.)


The 5C+4M hands
(My solution to this is that the old school responses are obsolete. With a proper structures of responses 2C isnt a big problem.)


Opponents interferring over 1C.
(We open 1C with GF hands or 15-17 with a 5M or 16+ clubs or balanced, so that 18-22 with 5M we open them 1M.) This lead to less problem for intervention, but the cost is no LOB.


NT range
(we play wide ranging Nt with structure that is geared for invitationnal hands. White we play 10-14 and 1C-1Nt is 15-18, 1C-2D is 19-20 ,1C--2H is 21-22 etc.

Red its 12-15/16-19/20-21/22-23 etc.

What I don't like about precision and my solution to it.

1C for 16+, leading to opening 1C too often.
(I strongly suggest to play 17+)

1D--that show only 2.
(You can play 1D to show 0+ to avoid having to waste a mini-Roman opening and allow 2C to promise 6+C. From what I've seen of top level precision, super-nebulous 1D is the way to go-not because 0+ is better - 4+D is certainly better-but because it saves on other bids, notably improving the 2C opening and removing the need for the 2D mini-Roman)

The 5C+4M hands
(My solution is to make 2C promise 6+C, making hand evaluation easier)

The 2D opening. Too infrequent. Opening these as 1D, while inferior, you still do not lose the major fits and does not provide a roadmap for the opps in defense or play.

NT range
(Smaller NT ranges are better. 14-16 NT, with 1C-1NT rebid showing 17-19 etc)

Okay some of the above was just having a go at Ben's points - but they're valid points (I too prefer 1C as 15+, but not to increase frequency as Ben said (strongly disagree with) but to allow 9-14 as the opening range rather than 10-15).

[Gerben42]

My solution to the Precision "problems".

a. Opening 1♣: Here there is a problem that as a passed hand, being positiv doesn't come up too often. That's why I prefer 1♣ to be 15+ (16 if bal.) in 1st and 2nd, 17+ (18 if bal.) in 3rd and 4th.

b. Opening 1♦: I use a 12-15 NT in 1st and 2nd seat in combination with a bid showing the 3-suiters, so in this case 1♦ is actually 3+cards and unbalanced (3 cards only with 5♣)

c. Opening 1NT: This is opened systemically on 4225 and 2425 hands.

d. Opening 2♦: This shows the 3-suited hand, with distributions 4414, 4315, 3415 and 4405.

e. Opening 2♣: Because of c and d, this now promises SIX cards (phew )

Oh, in 3rd & 4th seat we play 15-17 NT. The 12-14 type has to start with 1♦, but this cannot really be helped.

* Solution to further auctions after the negative response: Have 1♥ show a 2nd positive. This will mess up the hands with ♥, but only a bit as we take the specific Moscito rebids here, which limit opener's hand and manage to get the shape across quite well.

* Solution for big 2-suiters that don't do well opening 1♣ and then never managing to show both suits in time: MisIry

[NickRW]

Gerben42, on Oct 17 2008, 09:30 AM, said:

My solution to the Precision "problems".

a. Opening 1♣: Here there is a problem that as a passed hand, being positiv doesn't come up too often. That's why I prefer 1♣ to be 15+ (16 if bal.) in 1st and 2nd, 17+ (18 if bal.) in 3rd and 4th.

Isn't this, actually, just a 3rd seat problem (if you regard it as a problem)?

In 4th seat, pard rates to have (40-16)/3 = 8hcp a lot of the time. It is true that in 3rd seat LHO, as an unpassed hand, will have more than their fair share of the outstanding cards quite a bit.

Having said that I am not sure that 16 is the right level to set a 1C opener anyway. At that level you're arguably not using 1C often enough to put all those potentially delicate sequences to maximum use plus you're just strong enough to make the 1C opener a major target for preemptive enemy action (as they have 24 max and therefore game is unlikely their way).

Surely better to put the 1C opener generally down to 15 or include some weaker options in 1C as in Polish or AUC (or whatever variant on the multi way club theme).

So, I guess I disagree with you about 4th seat, but not so much on 3rd - and quite like the idea of a 15+ 1C for other reasons.

Nick