[bluecalm]

Precision, 1♦ promises 2.
So the bidding goes:

1♦ - 1♠
2♣

Here not only 4-5, 5-4, 5-5, 4-4, 3-5 in minors is possible but also a hand like:

x
Axxx
KJxxx
KJx

struggles to find anything different than 2♣.

As we play jumps to 2♥/2♠ as 5♠-4+♥ I thought about handling this situation in the following way:

1♦ - 1♠
1NT* - ???

*1NT may be stiff ♠ if exactly 1-4-5-3 or 1-4-4-4. Now :
2♣/2♦ usual 2 way checback.
2♥ = 6+♠ either signoff or GF (this was basically o bid without meaning before)
2♠ = exactly 5♠ to play opposite xx or better but asks partner to remove to 2NT with stiff.

Advantages:
-We won't play in 5-1 ♠ suit anymore and still have a chance to find our 5-3/5-2 fit
-We will sometimes get to play 1NT instead of some possibly silly minor suit contract

Disadvantages:
-We will sometimes be in 2NT on not too many hcp
-another system thing to remember


Thoughts ?

[helene_t]

With a weak hand with 5 spades just pass 1nt.

[jdonn]

How do you play 2♥ now?

[bluecalm]

Quote

With a weak hand with 5 spades just pass 1nt.

The problem with this is that I believe that partscore on 5-2 spades is very often better than 1NT and if partner has 3 (we never raise with 3 on balanced hand) it's always better.

Quote

How do you play 2♥ now?

1♦ - 2♥ = 5♠-4+♥ below invite
1♦ - 2♠ = as above but 10-12hcp
1♦ - 1♠
1NT - 2♥ = wasn't used at all.

[jdonn]

Right it's the last one I was wondering. Why not play 2♥ as a transfer as you say showing weak or gf with spades, and 2♠ as invitational with 6 spades. Instead of worrying about 5-1 fits just stay lower on invitational hands. You don't want to play 2NT with a 5-1 fit there any more than you want to play 2♠.

[bluecalm]

So do you bid 1NT with stiff ♠ and transfer on 5 card suit and weakish hand (KQTxx xx xxx Qxx) or pass as Helen suggested ?
I really don't like passing. I thought that's the basic reason it's standard (I think) to require 2cards in every suit for 1NT rebid, so partner could go to 2♠ with just 5.

Quote

Instead of worrying about 5-1 fits just stay lower on invitational hands

Yeah, actually I like that part very much. It's my goal in life not to play in 3M or 2NT

[junyi_zhu]

bluecalm, on May 7 2010, 11:23 PM, said:

So do you bid 1NT with stiff ♠ and transfer on 5 card suit and weakish hand (KQTxx xx xxx Qxx) or pass as Helen suggested ?
I really don't like passing. I thought that's the basic reason it's standard (I think) to require 2cards in every suit for 1NT rebid, so partner could go to 2♠ with just 5.

Quote

Instead of worrying about 5-1 fits just stay lower on invitational hands

Yeah, actually I like that part very much. It's my goal in life not to play in 3M or 2NT

that's basically saying that with 5-1 fit in S, one can't play 1NT with standard treatments. I don't see any logic here. That's also a weakness of standard treatment.
Suppose you hold JTxxx Kx Ax Qxxx
you certainly want to play 1NT if partner holds
x AQxx KQJxx Jxx because it's cold no matter what they lead, but you just can't if you don't bid 1NT with any singletons. Then opener has quite a few poisons to choose:
2C: responder would bid 3C, and you are unhappy.
2D: responder would bid 2NT, you are one level higher than 1NT, which is ok in this lay out, and might not ok if you hand is slightly weaker.
Sometimes, responder would bid 3D with two diamonds like:
AQxxx xx Ax xxxx which means that you would play 5-2 fit 3D sometimes. My basic rule of thumb is that if you rebid a minor with 5 card suits, you need to have extra to accept a possible doubleton invitational raise, otherwise it's just too ugly IMO.
Also, 5-2 2M fits often don't play better than 1NT if responder's hand isn't very weak. Allowing 1NT bidder to hold a singleton in responder's suit will be a standard treatment in the future I guess.

[straube]

bluecalm, on May 7 2010, 05:57 PM, said:

Precision, 1♦ promises 2.
So the bidding goes:

1♦ - 1♠
2♣

Here not only 4-5, 5-4, 5-5, 4-4, 3-5 in minors is possible but also a hand like:

x
Axxx
KJxxx
KJx

struggles to find anything different than 2♣.

As we play jumps to 2♥/2♠ as 5♠-4+♥ I thought about handling this situation in the following way:

1♦ - 1♠
1NT* - ???

*1NT may be stiff ♠ if exactly 1-4-5-3 or 1-4-4-4. Now :
2♣/2♦ usual 2 way checback.
2♥ = 6+♠ either signoff or GF (this was basically o bid without meaning before)
2♠ = exactly 5♠ to play opposite xx or better but asks partner to remove to 2NT with stiff.

Advantages:
-We won't play in 5-1 ♠ suit anymore and still have a chance to find our 5-3/5-2 fit
-We will sometimes get to play 1NT instead of some possibly silly minor suit contract

Disadvantages:
-We will sometimes be in 2NT on not too many hcp
-another system thing to remember


Thoughts ?

Getting to 2N with a 5-1 fit and insufficient hcps is very bad and it would seem to occur fairly often.

You could use your 2S rebid to show GI with 5 spades (or use 2C followed by 2H or 2S to show 5 spades) but you ought not try to offer a spade contract with only 5 spades when you are weak.

Since you use reverse Flannery here, responder's worst holding for a 2C rebid is 5332 and if opener rebids 2C with say 1-4-5-3 then the worst that can happen is a 3-3 fit.

I looked at a bunch of hands and found that the 3-3 fit is very infrequent. Often, too, one finds a minor suit fit that wouldn't have been found if opener had rebid 1N.

I was on the same track as you, but Foobar kept wanting a 1N rebid to be balanced and I think he was right.

Also, subsequent bidding is easier after 1D-1S, 2C because you can relay opener's shape with 2H GF bid.

[dake50]

Precision is what? 45 years old and still solving poorly thought-out after 1D methods?
WOW!!
Shouldn't those have been long ago measured (estimated) in profit-loss for the Precision system? Where were the skeptics, analysts? Hook line and sinker to the sales pitch?!

[bluecalm]

Quote

I looked at a bunch of hands and found that the 3-3 fit is very infrequent. Often, too, one finds a minor suit fit that wouldn't have been found if opener had rebid 1N.

I was on the same track as you, but Foobar kept wanting a 1N rebid to be balanced and I think he was right.

I think it may be right. I simulated 100 hands so far and I would prefer bidding 2♣ with minors either way (5-3, 3-5, 5-4, 4-5) than 1NT on those hand.
As you said, the main argument is that we often find better partscore than 1NT especially if 1♠ could be light.

Quote

because you can relay opener's shape with 2H GF bid.

Well, there are quite few shapes:
1-4-4-4, 1-4-3-5, 1-4-5-3, 2-2-4-5, 2-2-5-4, 1-3-4-5, 1-3-5-4, 1-2-5-5 and that's not including strength and ♥ stopper. I think it's still kinda difficult to bid after 2♣.

[straube]

bluecalm, on May 8 2010, 04:44 PM, said:

Quote

I looked at a bunch of hands and found that the 3-3 fit is very infrequent. Often, too, one finds a minor suit fit that wouldn't have been found if opener had rebid 1N.

I was on the same track as you, but Foobar kept wanting a 1N rebid to be balanced and I think he was right.

I think it may be right. I simulated 100 hands so far and I would prefer bidding 2♣ with minors either way (5-3, 3-5, 5-4, 4-5) than 1NT on those hand.
As you said, the main argument is that we often find better partscore than 1NT especially if 1♠ could be light.

Quote

because you can relay opener's shape with 2H GF bid.

Well, there are quite few shapes:
1-4-4-4, 1-4-3-5, 1-4-5-3, 2-2-4-5, 2-2-5-4, 1-3-4-5, 1-3-5-4, 1-2-5-5 and that's not including strength and ♥ stopper. I think it's still kinda difficult to bid after 2♣.

We rebid 1N with the 22(54) hand. The last I heard (long time ago) Meckwell used some judgment and rebid 2C with a weak doubleton in the other major. But anyhow...

1D-1S, 2C-2H

2S-4D/5C or 8 cards in the minors
.....3C-8 cards in the minors
..........3H-1-4-4-4
..........3S-1-4-3-5
..........3N-1-4-5-3
.....3D-1-3-4-5
.....3H-0-4-4-5
2N-5D/4C
.....3D-1-3-5-4
.....3H-0-4-5-4
3C-5/5, higher shortness
3D-5/5, even shortness (i.e. a 6/5)
3H-2-1-5-5
3S-3-0-5-5
3N-2-0-5-6
4C-0-2-5-6

[bluecalm]

Thanks for that