[gurgistan]

I have just come to precision and it is clear impossible negatives are inferior to unusual positives as interference may make them impossible to show.

So, I am playing unusual positives. I though it easy: 2H,2S,3C,3D; all showing 8hcp+ and 4441 with the singleton in the named suit.

However, I have come across other schemas online.

I would imagine the simple one outlined above is the most popular.

Is that so?

[mtvesuvius]

I think it's better if you have 2♥ and higher available to use 2♥ as 12+ with shortness, and 2♠, 3♣, 3♦, 3♥ for 8-11 with stiffs. After 2♥, 2♠ asks, 2N is 16+, 3 level is 12-15.

You could use 2♥ as a 14+ BAL hand instead of shortness if you wanted as well.

[zasanya]

Power precision suggests
2♥=1-4-4-4 2♠= 4-4-4-1 3♣=4-4-1-4 and 3♦=4-1-4-4
Now opener can bid responder's singleton to find number of controls and quickly decide whether a slam or grand slam are possible.If the number of controls add up to suggest a Grand, Opener can rebid the singleton or nearest NT to find out about Queens.

[Zelandakh]

It is more efficient to bid the suit below the singleton and use the singleton suit as a relay ask. There are plenty of different answering schemes around depending on what hands are included and whether you like LTC or something else. A generic scheme might be for the first relay to ask about strength and shape (4441 or 5440); the second relay to ask about number of controls; and for the third relay to ask about queens, the latter best played in denial form in case the bidding is already at the 6 level. Naturally you can do more if you have the space.

[dake50]

As mtvesuvius, divide the old "Impossible Negatives":12+/ 8-11 is about right.
I have a C-xfer that may also be some 3x4's 8-11.
And some "ImpNeg" still in 1D(neg).

[mycroft]

I use the Berkowitz & Manley version:

3m - 8-11, black (♣) or red (♦) singleton, relay asks, bidding the singleton after is a control count ask;
3H, 3NT, 4m - 12+, 4+ controls, bid suit under singleton, again, bidding the singleton is a control count ask, starting with 4;
(3S is unspecified solid suit, so that the undefined hand can play NT)

For the 2000 hands a year we play, it works and doesn't need to be more complicated. It also allows for 1C-2M to be HHxxxx and out, which, while it never comes up, is a really nice hand not to have to deal with after 1C-1D. I do like some of these other sequences, though, if you're willing to give that up.

[gurgistan]

zasanya, on 2011-February-25, 00:02, said:

Power precision suggests
2♥=1-4-4-4 2♠= 4-4-4-1 3♣=4-4-1-4 and 3♦=4-1-4-4
Now opener can bid responder's singleton to find number of controls and quickly decide whether a slam or grand slam are possible.If the number of controls add up to suggest a Grand, Opener can rebid the singleton or nearest NT to find out about Queens.

I really like this. What are the steps for the controls, please?

[PrecisionL]

We use Berkowitz - Manley's 3-level bids for 8-11 and 2♥ for all 4441s if 12+ HCP.

2♠ asks for the singleton and replies are 1-under. This allows the bid of the singleton to be Beta for Controls or bid of the trump suit to be RKC so you can ask later about the Queen (maybe the J).

[dcohio]

mycroft, on 2011-February-25, 12:09, said:

I use the Berkowitz & Manley version:

3m - 8-11, black (♣) or red (♦) singleton, relay asks, bidding the singleton after is a control count ask;
3H, 3NT, 4m - 12+, 4+ controls, bid suit under singleton, again, bidding the singleton is a control count ask, starting with 4;
(3S is unspecified solid suit, so that the undefined hand can play NT)

For the 2000 hands a year we play, it works and doesn't need to be more complicated. It also allows for 1C-2M to be HHxxxx and out, which, while it never comes up, is a really nice hand not to have to deal with after 1C-1D. I do like some of these other sequences, though, if you're willing to give that up.

This is also the scheme we use. I like it alot.

[zasanya]

gurgistan, on 2011-February-25, 15:47, said:

I really like this. What are the steps for the controls, please?

A king is considered 1 control, Ace is 2 controls .Thus to begin with there are 12 controls in the pack.If both hands are balanced you need 9 or more controls to make a slam feasible.If one of the hands is having a singleton then 8 should be sufficient.
When Opener bids responders singleton the next step is 1 control second 2 controls and so on Thus if the bidding goes 1 Club-2S(club singleton)-3Clubs 3 Diamond is 1 king 3 Heart is 2 kings or 1 ace etc.The singleton king is not counted.
If Opener makes a grand slam try by bidding responder's singleton (or if responder has shown 5 controls then by bidding singleton or cheapest NT)
Then the responses are 0 Q : cheapest NT 1-2 : suit of cheapest queen (followup of stiff or cheapest NT ask for more queens.)
3 : bid your stiff. Singleton Q is not counted.
If responder has 4-4-4-1 without a control then responder bids 1 Diamond even if having 9+ hcp.
If you are serious about power precision then refer to http://www.bridgewithdan.com/systems/
If you are more serious take a look at Viking Club elucidated on same site.

[gurgistan]

zasanya, on 2011-February-27, 22:45, said:

A king is considered 1 control, Ace is 2 controls .Thus to begin with there are 12 controls in the pack.If both hands are balanced you need 9 or more controls to make a slam feasible.If one of the hands is having a singleton then 8 should be sufficient.
When Opener bids responders singleton the next step is 1 control second 2 controls and so on Thus if the bidding goes 1 Club-2S(club singleton)-3Clubs 3 Diamond is 1 king 3 Heart is 2 kings or 1 ace etc.The singleton king is not counted.
If Opener makes a grand slam try by bidding responder's singleton (or if responder has shown 5 controls then by bidding singleton or cheapest NT)
Then the responses are 0 Q : cheapest NT 1-2 : suit of cheapest queen (followup of stiff or cheapest NT ask for more queens.)
3 : bid your stiff. Singleton Q is not counted.
If responder has 4-4-4-1 without a control then responder bids 1 Diamond even if having 9+ hcp.
If you are serious about power precision then refer to http://www.bridgewithdan.com/systems/
If you are more serious take a look at Viking Club elucidated on same site.

Thank you for responding.

I am looking to play this within the context of a rather old-fashioned precision. My 1C shows 16hcp+ therefore I am thinking that Opener needs to be 22hcp+ to make the slam try and will mostly be signing off in somekind of game: 3N/4H/4S/5C/5D rather than playing for slam. Likewise my unusual positive responder will need to take up the baton and move onto slam if he has more than his minimum 8hcp. I guess that would be easy enough he could Gerber over 3N and RKB 1430 over a suit and perhaps cuebid.

Do you think this sounds viable?

Your comments are much sought.

[zasanya]

"I am looking to play this within the context of a rather old-fashioned precision. My 1C shows 16hcp+ therefore I am thinking that Opener needs to be 22hcp+ to make the slam try and will mostly be signing off in somekind of game: 3N/4H/4S/5C/5D rather than playing for slam. Likewise my unusual positive responder will need to take up the baton and move onto slam if he has more than his minimum 8hcp. I guess that would be easy enough he could Gerber over 3N and RKB 1430 over a suit and perhaps cuebid.

Do you think this sounds viable?

Your comments are much sought."
[/quote]
If you play power precision scheme then 1♣ opener takes all the decisions .Sometimes with the same info different people would take different decisions.To illustrate the point here is an example.Yesterday i played in an imp pairs tournament where the following hand turned up.

---

I was South 1♣=16+ 3♦=9+hcp 4-1-4-4 shape 3♥=asking controls 4♣=3 controls i.e. 1A+2K OR 3K
After 3♦ N who has only 17 hcp asked for controls.The response told him P has 1A and 1K.So S could have 1) ♠AK or ♠k and ♥A in which case slam depends on ♦finesse or 2) ♠A and ♦K in which case slam depends on ♠finesse and a ♠ break not worse than 3-1 or 3) ♥A and ♦K in which case slam has no chance.
My P decided to bid slam I wouldn't have.But then he is a colonel in the indian army and i am a school teacher.

[olien]

I like a version that allows for showing any 4441 and 5m(440). Its not as simple as the ones suggested, but works well.

2♠ = (41)44 or 04(54)
2NT = 44(41)
3♣ = any solid suit
3♦ = 40(54)
3♥ = 4405
3♠ = 4450 8-10
3NT = 4450 11-13
4♣ = 4450 14+

(by a passed hand, 3♣ = 4045 and 3♦ = 4054)

after 2♠, 2NT is the relay, then:
3♣ = 04(54), then 3♦ relays for longer minor/strength
3♦ = 1444
3♥ = 4144, 8-9
3♠ = 4144, 10-11
3NT = 4144, 12-13
4♣ = 4144, 14+

after 2NT, 3♣ is the relay, then:
3♦ = 4414
3♥ = 4441 8-9
3♠ = 4441 10-11
3NT = 4441 12-13
4♣ = 4441 14+

After a 3♦ response by an unpassed hand, the longer minor is not clarified.

Of course, one can use controls or QP's instead of HCP or also choose to use low->high shortness instead of the reverse, but this is the structure that is used by one very successful precision partnership.

[rduran1216]

zasanya, on 2011-February-28, 11:43, said:

"I am looking to play this within the context of a rather old-fashioned precision. My 1C shows 16hcp+ therefore I am thinking that Opener needs to be 22hcp+ to make the slam try and will mostly be signing off in somekind of game: 3N/4H/4S/5C/5D rather than playing for slam. Likewise my unusual positive responder will need to take up the baton and move onto slam if he has more than his minimum 8hcp. I guess that would be easy enough he could Gerber over 3N and RKB 1430 over a suit and perhaps cuebid.

Do you think this sounds viable?

Your comments are much sought."
If you play power precision scheme then 1♣ opener takes all the decisions .Sometimes with the same info different people would take different decisions.To illustrate the point here is an example.Yesterday i played in an imp pairs tournament where the following hand turned up.

---

I was South 1♣=16+ 3♦=9+hcp 4-1-4-4 shape 3♥=asking controls 4♣=3 controls i.e. 1A+2K OR 3K
After 3♦ N who has only 17 hcp asked for controls.The response told him P has 1A and 1K.So S could have 1) ♠AK or ♠k and ♥A in which case slam depends on ♦finesse or 2) ♠A and ♦K in which case slam depends on ♠finesse and a ♠ break not worse than 3-1 or 3) ♥A and ♦K in which case slam has no chance.
My P decided to bid slam I wouldn't have.But then he is a colonel in the indian army and i am a school teacher.

partner can find out with CAB's in hearts and then diamonds, to know its on a hook and be able to raise 5S to 6 if he feels lucky

[straube]

1) Have you considered what to do when opener is 4441 and hears a natural GF suit response? Meckwell reserves the first 5 bids for opener to show other suits, balanced, or raises. The 6th, 7th, and so on steps show 4441s with singletons in partners suit and 16-17, 18-19, 20-21 etc pt ct ranges. At least the very old notes I have said so.

2) I'd play something simple like...2S shows a plus 4441 and asks opener to relay for shortness while immediate 3-level bids show 8-10 and shortness.

3) It seems silly to invest so much time on the 4441 hand patterns. I see suggestions for asking for controls and such thereafter and I'm thinking that's a big investment of memorization for such a small number of hand patterns. Sure, hands that are not 4441 are either balanced or have a 5-cd suit and so have a bid, but you'll never learn their patterns unless you go relay. I'd explore a simple relay system.

[mycroft]

4441s in any system are a pain. If there's space available that isn't being used for something more useful, and that space is sufficient to handle it, getting the 4441s out of the world is a plus. I don't currently have anything for 4441s by opener, but actually reversing the asks isn't a bad idea.

It really doesn't take much "time" to do the Berkowitz-Manley thing; it's not completely effective by any means, but it seems an effective tradeoff between effectiveness and system load. It's certainly better than the "impossible negative" or hiding 4441s in the 5-card positives or treating them as balanced.