[kenberg]

You are thinking far more analytically than I am. I started with the 1♦ because it seems to me that everyone likes to devise methods for coping with the Precision 1♣ but there is not much on the 1♦. The omission interests me. You might be right that it is no big deal to cope with it, but I am not so sure so I thought I would lookl over some hands to see how it goes. Looking at high level games is for two reasons. First, high level games are just generally more interesting. It's less likely that the result will be due to dumb luck, although that can sometimes happen at any level. But the second reason is that this is the level where the players can pretty much be trusted to come in with some thought out ways of dealing with big club systems. I am interested in seeing where this had led them. While I can imagine this all influencing my actions, I actually don't encounter precision often enough for this to be my main purpose. I just find it interesting.

As to the Precision 1♦ being easier to defend against,, suppose that I am 4-4 in the majors, 4-1 in the minors, and I have a 12 count. Rho opens 1♦. Against standard, I double with a stiff diamond, pass with a stiff club hoping to come in later. Against Precision, I am considerably less happy when I have the stiff club. Some of the early responses here suggest doubling anyway. Maybe that's right, on balance, but I will be a bit tense waiting for partner's response. Again, it will interest me to see what the top players do at the table.

Against the Precision 1♣, everyone says you have to get in there and jam the auction. I suppose so, but I have generally thought that when I get into the auction I should either want to play in what I bid or I should want the suit led. Preferably both. If neither is true, I am inclined to pass. Yes, I also still like listening to Frank Sinatra.

One more thought. There are a lot of conventions out there, and I use a fair number of them. It seems to me that the real money now is in the counter-convention business. I'll give just one example, not from Precision. Some yhears back it became popular to play transfers over the opponents opening 1NT. 1NT-(2♦ showed hearts. What an invention. It worked well. But then folks realized that third hand now had a lot more options. For starters, 2♥ was available as a transfer. to spades. Also, one could double to show good values with no clear direction. One could have the immediate double of 2♦ show one thing, while waiting for the completion to 2♥ and then doubling showed something else. Perhaps transfer overcalls arfe a good idea, perhaps they are not, but they present an opportunity to the opening side providing they are prepared to exploit it.

Again, I am interested in what the top level players actually do. I expect some of it will be too complex for my casual partnerships. I may not adopt it and I will not be publishing a paper, I just am looking forward toi doing some browsing.Phil put me onto http://bridgetoernoo...hp/home/search2
I like it. A lot.

[gnasher]

kenberg, on 2012-December-06, 16:13, said:

Pursuing that thought, suppose you are North and after three passes there is a minor suit opening on your right. Your call? Does it matter whether the opening is a possibly short precision diaomnd or a possibly three card more or less standard one club? Or to vary the question, if you were playing with three clones (that's clones, not clowns) how would you envision the auction going in precision, and how in standard? We end in 3♥? Making? Presumably no one is doubling 3♥ at imps?

Playing standard:
       p    p    p
1♣  1♥  2♦  3♥
4♦   p    p    p

Playing Precision with a loose diamond:
       p    p    p
1♦  1♥  2♦  3♥
4♦   p    p    p

So basically the same auction: West opens something that is either natural or balanced, North overcalls, East makes a two-level response in diamonds, South raises to a sensible level, and West competes to 4♦, which looks like a normal action but turns out to be incorrect.

[gnasher]

Alternatively, North starts with a double, so South can bid only 2♥. Now opener is able to raise diamonds cheaply, and no longer feels the need to compete to 4♦.

Playing standard:
       p    p    p
1♣  dbl  1♦  2♥
3♦   3♥    p    p
p

Playing Precision with a loose diamond:
       p    p    p
1♦  dbl  2♦  2♥
3♦   3♥    p    p

[kenberg]

Interesting. In 1981, both tables reach 3♦. In the more aggressive modern style, both tables reach 4♦.

This was imps, not BAM, but suppose BAM. I am right, am I not, that 4♦X is par (where by par I mean the contract that would be chosen if all cards were face up)? Against 3♥ the defense gets a spade, two diamonds and a club, no heart if declarer works it out. I don't see what could be done. Of course the cards are not played face up, so even experts can fail to take the winning line sometimes.

Against 3♥ the defense has exactly four side suit tricks so I suppose that if they realize this they could try starting with three rounds of diamonds. The sluff/ruff does declarer no good but it is not clear to me that it does him any lasting harm either. He can trump in hand, for example, then pick up the trump, and he still has one trump in each hand for protection as he goes after the side suits.

I can well understand he might be losing a heart in real life.

[JLOGIC]

I think you are too focused on the exact hand and possible results.

You need to think more in terms of "it is bad to sell out to 3D with a 9 card heart fit and about half the deck and most of the heart honors when they have 9 diamonds and all of the honors and about half the deck."

Also, it is better to bid to 3H right away before they have described their hands to induce them to make more errors in competitive bidding.

This is basically the law of total tricks type stuff, as well as bidding to the limit ASAP. It is not revolutionary at this point. Sure 3H would probably go down but that is what bridge is about, you want to declare 3H with a chance to make rather than sell out to a cold 3D. And you want to give them a chance to err by bidding 4D over your 3H. Worst case scenario you go down 100 when they make 110 but you have tremendous upside of winning a partscore swing if you either make 3H or you get them to bid 4D.

You are right that 4441 is annoying when they open 1D, in the same way that 4414 is annoying when they open 1C. There is not really a solution to that unless you want to abandon minors completely and start doubling which I think is wrong. Generally you have to pass and hope to bid later if you get a chance. Don't worry about being "behind" people who open 1C, sometimes these things work in your favor and you are "ahead" of people who open 1C.

[kenberg]

Back to the site http://bridgetoernoo...hp/home/search2
I recommend this site and I thank Phil for providing it. This time I started by looking at the most recent hands first, again searching under Maeckstroth 1D. Some were overcalls, some uninteresting, but here is deal 9 from the US Mindsports 2012. Meck is South.

---

Since I am skipping over the hands where I think system makes no difference, perhaps it is not a complete surprise that this hand has features in common with the last one.There is a nine card fit in each direction, the LAW is right on target with a total of 18 tricks. Making these tricks requires the right line of play. EW got +140 here. The lead was a heart, then declarer cashed one high spade, went to the board, ran the 9. Easy enough, I would think. It's more interesting on a club lead, for two reasons. The entry is now off the board, so the spade finesse has to be taken on the first round. Also, the spade 9 becomes important because we also have to, later, lead a heart from the board. Perhaps an opening 1♣ call would have produced that lead. The spade 9 will still be on the board, no lead or system will change that.

Added: At the othr table Cullin opend 1♣ for Sweden. The contract was 3♠. Flat board.

Playing in 4♣ we have to pick up the Jack to hold it to down 1. My own style, if there has been an overcall, is that the default line is to take the finesse. I would see no reason to depart from that here, so I would pick up the Jack.

The scoring here was imps, so I double many would go on to 4♣ although a club opening bid, in standard bidding, would up the chances. I gather that EW were playing their jump overcalls as fairly strong, at least at these colors.

I repeat that I have no agenda here, I am not trying to build a case for or against any system. My guess is that if the scoring were BAM and N could open 1♣, at least some NS pairs would be in 4♣, probably doubled. I don't expect big club players to give up their system based on this observation. In this case it was imps and I have not yet found the result at the other table, but going on to 4♣ seems less likely to me at imps.

I do have a view about the LAW. It seems to me that often, during the bidding, it is not really clear what the total number of trumps for both sides is, the play of the hand will determine how many tricks are actually taken, and the formula is right only some of the time anyway. For example, with double dummy pay and defense, 3♠ cannot be made on a clb lead if we trade positions of the 8 and 9 of spades. Or at least I don't think it can be made. That doesn't mean that I think the LAW is useless, not at all, but you often see in profiles edicts such as Obey The LAW. This is overstating matters, imo.

[Gerben42]

What's surprising is that whereas Strong Club seems very popular in the US, it is virtually non-existent now in Europe. OK one top pair plays Tarzan Precision but most just play some kind of natural, 2/1, Fantunes, Polish Club, i.e. lots of things in which openings like 1♠ are not that limited.

[glen]

Gerben42, on 2012-December-09, 12:49, said:

What's surprising is that whereas Strong Club seems very popular in the US, it is virtually non-existent now in Europe ...

Various countries around the Baltic Sea, including the Viking Club, and some Russian pairs

[kenberg]

Soldiering on, I found another. Again it's a shaggy dog story. The system might have mattered but didn't. Again from Mind Sports 2012, USA vs Sweden..

---

Everyone vul. Imps.

Meckwell NS started with 1♦ and had an unobstructed auction to 4♠

Nystrom/Upmark began 1♣-Pass-1♥, presumably showing spades.


Zia came in with a double and Hamman showed his hearts, but they never found the 5♦ sacrifice ( and 5♥ is not a sacrifice they want to go with). Flat board.

The LAW says 19 total tricks and i guess that is true: Heart opening lead against 5♦ and then when in with the diamond King, underlead in spades to get to pard in for the ruff. Could be, but at least if S is on lead I expect 5♦ is down one, not two. Well, there is this issue ion clubs.

So far what I seem to be seeing is that everyone could be playing Goren without changing the result!. I'll keep searching.