[jillybean]

I was lamenting with another bbfer recently, the inadequacies of opening strong hands 2nt. Which got me thinking the answer to all my woes could lie with precision.
I only see a few serious partnerships playing precision , why isn’t it more popular among regular partnerships?

[mike777]

Charles Goren Presents the Precision System of Contract Bridge Bidding
by Charles Henry Goren

The second bridge book I ever bought. The red cover book!


The first was the classic 5 Weeks to Winning Bridge.
Unfortunately it is taking me more than 5 weeks.

[jdiana]

I thought this would be a continuation of the discussion re: the Schuler Shift . . .

[mikeh]

Virtually nobody plays precision as it was described in early books on the subject, be they CC Wei’s original or Goren’s transparent attempt to cash in on the then-growing popularity of the approach or books like Power Precision that added all kinds of artificiality

Most of the NA pros who play a strong club system use a method known, generically, as Meckwell Lite. Based on the extraordinarily complex methods used by Rodwell and Meckstroth, it is significantly less complex but still requires a lot of work to adopt without costly ‘forgets’.

I’ve played basic precision. I’ve played a home-grown bid club system. There are hands on which I would like still to be playing a forcing club method. But it is, imo, a serious mistake to think that changing to a big club method is any kind of panacea.

1. You won’t find many partners with any real experience, so you’ll likely both be struggling to adjust to the very different problems that big club methods present, compared to 2/1 or standard American

2. Big club methods have several built-in weaknesses. They also offer several inherent strengths. The issue is whether the latter offset the former. There are ways to reduce the impact of the weaknesses but they’re not simple nor perfect. So….are you and partner open to learning several artificial ways of coping with the weaknesses and are you able to exploit the strengths?

Weaknesses:

1. Preemption. Big club methods suffer from the basic fact that the 1C opener doesn’t get to describe the nature of his hand….long suit, balanced, two suited, 16-18, 19-22, or 23+ (using arbitrary ranges for the sake of explanation, don’t pay too much attention to the actual numbers I have used)….until the second round of the auction. The same applies, to a much lesser degree, after 1C (P) 1D (preempt)

Standard bidders get to name their main suit right away, but 1C openers may be at the 3 or 4 level by the time the auction gets back to them. That of course impacts responder as well….they may not discover their fit or lack of fit until an uncomfortable level.

2. The 1D opening, closely tied into the 2D opening. How many diamonds does 1D promise? Some say 0. Others say 1. Still others say 2. Thus you and partner have to agree on this. Plus you have to discuss how to find a diamond fit if one exists, given that even those who open 1D on as few as zero may still have lots of diamonds sometimes.

It’s related to the 2D opening because most play that 2D is a three suited hand, short in diamonds, 11-15 hcp. While partnerships can vary here, it’s common that 2D could be 3=4=1=5/4=3=1=5/4=4=0=5.

How do you untangle this? How do you establish gf or invitational hands? How do you look for slam? How do you deal with interference? This are not insoluble, else few would play the method but they need work by both partners.

3. The 2C opening. Different pairs have different agreements. Can opener have a 4 card major? If so, how many clubs does he promise? Some say he can have a 4 card major but only with 6 clubs, others say 4=5 is permissible. How does responder find out what opener has? Not just about a major but about range, or stoppers for 3N. What does responder do with a weak hand and a long major? It’s common to play 2C 2M as constructive, nf. But what if responder is weak, very short in clubs, and has a 6 or 7 card major? Plus for big hands, 2C has taken away the entire 1 level.


All of these problems have solutions of varying degrees of effectiveness but you can’t just assume that playing a big club method without paying attention to these issues will improve your results. Fortunately, many top players have come up with ideas. While I’d have to do some digging to point you to resources, I suspect that googling ‘Meckwell lite’ should lead you to answers

Strengths

Here’s a hand where we lost a game swing when our counterparts played a big club. Axx Axx x AKQxxx opposite Qxxx KQxxx xxx x

We bid 1C 1D (showing 4+ hearts) 3C ppp

Now, opener could have (and arising from this hand, now would) make a fake reverse into 2D, but that has all kinds of risks, especially if one’s approach is that 2D shows 3+….responder might have very long diamonds, say 4=6 reds. At the other table, 1C 1D 2C 2H…..2H showed about 5-8 with 5 hearts….4H.

That’s a basic example of one of the best features of a forcing club method. Some pairs play big club when the opps are vulnerable but 2/1 otherwise. This isn’t as popular as it used to be, presumably because of the extra memory load of two entirely different methods…not that it was ever common. The reason for this is that non vulnerable opponents, especially at favourable, tend to preempt a lot over 1C. But if they stay out, as they often have to, a big club method can provide really good results in terms of game and slam bidding.

Also, most big club players open 1M light. The approach varies amongst partnerships but I’ve played against pairs whose 1M is shown as 8-15….and all expert big club bidders upgrade good 15 count hands into 1C quite often. Btw, I’ve not seen any extend this range to 1D or 2C or 2D….for reasons that I hope are self explanatory.

Being able to open in a major, especially spades, with light hands wouldn’t be safe if the range were, say, 8-22. That’s simply too wide a range for the partnership to be able to bid accurately. In constructive bidding, a primary early goal is to refine opener’s strength as well as his shape, and there’s just insufficient room compared to standard bidders using, say, 11-22.

Playing a big club, opener’s 8-15 is actually tighter than in standard bidding. So constructive accuracy is enhanced and there can be significant gains from preempting LHO by opening 1M on a light hand.

It’s not perfect…nothing is. For example, it gives away information that a pass wouldn’t have, but it is a definite relative strength.



So…if you can find a good resource for methods and a partner interested in putting in the work, go for it.


Last word: most of the club level players who play big club don’t put in the work and/or haven’t found the necessary resources. A simple big club is, imo, awful. The weaknesses prove costly time and time again, because these partnerships lack the agreements needed to reduce their impact, and they don’t use the advantages to any real degree. For example, their 1M openings are 12-15.

Good luck….

[mw64ahw]

If by strong NT you mean 20-21 then I improve bidding accuracy by making 2N 24+ and use reverse 'birthright' for 20-21. Now using a non-promissory 5-card Major ask. I find all 4-4/5-3 Major suit fits, play in 3N when 55M versus 2254, play in 3M/3m when responder is 'bust and identify minor suit slams. Time to stop lamenting and evolve the 2♣ opening before moving to a Strong ♣; you'll then find some techniques are transferable.🤔

[pescetom]

Not sure why you see Precision as a fix for the (sometimes exaggerated and often self-inflicted) difficulties of the 2NT opening ?
I've not played Precision and never encounter it (unlike 4cM strong club systems), but there are hundreds of pages of discussion on this forum and my impression is that the objective is to gain with the limited 1M openings, not the rest.
Mycroft and mikeh will undoubtedly be more informed.

[Edit: written before the comment of mikeh which I imagine is the works]