Chamaco

Hi Peter, of course there are many, improved, Precision versions. My question was geared towards "old fashioned precison " as requested by Caren. In "old fashioned precision", the sequences 1C-1D-2m are NONFORCING, and 1C-1D-1M are FORCING 1R, even with a 4 card suit, possibly in canapè. As a result, many times opener prefers to show his major in canapè style, amd the 2m rebid, although not 100% of the times, will *tend* to deny a side 4card Major (otherwise responder will often be in trouble in deciding whether to try to improve the partscore in a major or passout 2m).

Sure, Roland you are right, I forgot to mention I assumed 2/1 GF. Of course if 2D can be an invitational hand, then we need a forcing raise for diamonds and 3D is NF.

I hate splintering just to show shortness if my values are concentrated in 2 suits. Of course sometimes the splinter is the only real choice (to set trumps below game), but as a general rule I think the splinter should emphasize values in all the 3 suits, not just in 2 of them. Here I have a perfectly valid alternative to a splinter, 3D (which I prefer to 4D, because I can go slower and learn more of pard's hand), so I'll bid 3D. However, I can see how a 4D bid might work better than 3D.

So am I ! I hope ! :) Hehe don't worry my friends :-)) It's still possible to add as friend by right-click when that person is logged in :-) The trouble arises when the person is offline and u'd like to add him/her as friend by entering the nick :-)

"You talking to me ?!?!?" Robert De Niro (Taxi Driver), being asked the meaning of his partner's bid.

My opinion is that BB advanced should stay there in an "advanced" but simple way, keeping some indeterminations open. There must be a middle way between play SAYC and competitive 2/1 systems, I think it's unfair to go tell to the improving players: "If you want to learn a sistem that is not plain, just learn the whole BWS". Many improving players would like to start adding *some* conventions but not the entire BWS. Perhaps it's just a matter of name: what about "Expert BBO system" ? :)

Would anyone have considered overcalling a natural 1NT with Qxxxx in hearts ?

Usually when a bid looks obvious, that's because it is :) If I can't splinter with this hand I'm not sure what I can splinter with. I always thought that the splinter could be played in 2 totally different ways: a. "LIMITED splinter": the splinter promises shortness + support and a forward going hand, but pard is allowed to signoff if he has wasted values. in other words, if the partner of the "splinterer" cuebids, he has real willingness to go to slam, and he is not cuebidding "just in case". If he has wasted values, he shall signoff despite having one or more cues. b. unlimited splinter: the splinter shows *at least* gamegoing values, but could be stronger. In this case, the cuebid by his partner is much less clear: should he cue anything even with a bad hand or should he be allowed to signoff if holds wasted values ? Unfortunately, most splinters bypass the "serious 3NT" and leave no room for LTTC, so it's hard to discriminate. ================================ I prefer the option a (limited splinters): using this agreement means that some hands are too good to splinter, and IMO the hand shown in this thread was too good to splinter, and should have rather started with a 2NT relay, if available, or with a Game Try (if the relay was not available). After the game try, if responder continues to probe for slam, opener will understand pard has a great hand, and will feel free to cue. Of course, choosing to use "limited " splinters, means we'll use them much more rarely, but they'll be better defined. Tradeoffs, as usual :-)

Hey Jimmy, you are not alone ! :) I did not vote in the poll, but I'd bid the same as you :-) And about the "Nebulous" diamond issue in Standard American: that's true, *a priori*. But in this specific bidding sequence, after RHO shows a very unbalanced hand, I tend to believe my pard has probably real diamonds and not a weak NT.

I think that, over my double, pard shall bid 3NT with any excuse (even holding a potential 44 H fit) if he has a decent hand and spades stopper.

Same happened to me. Tried to add as friend some people having "_" in the *MIDDLE* of the id, but the software refused it.

Having the Fit Jump to 3C available, there is no need for further strategy. The 3C jump delivers all the info pard needs: - a mixed raise with 4 trumps - values concentrated only in the 2 suits. Using the FJS we can bid our hand in one go so the strategy is simply letting pard drive the auction, we have nothing more to say :) Pard will know not only of the trump fit but will be able to determine the honors fit and eventual wasted values, in case further decisions are needed.

Justin, do you think hand 2 has the right hcp content for a maximal double *at the 4 level* opposite a silent p ? I thought hand 2 would comply to a maximal double if the bidding comes back at the 2/3 level, but I would have expected that in order to double showing "cards" over 4S (which might often force a preference to the 5 level) I would need, say, at least a King more ? :) Would my pass with hand 2 (over 4S) be too much conservative ?

The T of ♥ in combination with AK and a 4 bagger is worth more than 1 hcp. So all these hands should be evaluated as having 1 extra hcp. Of course the crappy 4333 shape makes the hand to be downgraded. So I would open A and B, I consider them to be a full (albeit minimum) opener. I might open hands C and D 1st seat but not 2nd seat, I want my 2nd seat openers to be really flawless, 1st seat I might take a chance, but not 2nd seat at unfavorable.

The 1C-1D-2D sequence of Vanilla Precision is the worse of all: it eats a lot of space. So it needs to be well defined otherwise responder has to evaluate his hand at too high a level when deciding on borderline hands whether to make a move towards game or whether signing off worried of a potential misfit. I think most Precision pairs play that the 2D rebid by opener denies a side 4 card major (with a 4 card major they'll start with canapè). Assuming this agreement, the 3M rebid should just show values looking for 3NT.

1. Pass 2. 5D 3. Pass, pard's double tends to deny fit in diamonds, and excluding 5D there is no clear spot where to go. Expect to give one ruff or 2 to pard

Over 1♥ I use Kaplan Inversion: 1♥:? ....1♠ = 0-11 hcp (denies a GF hand), 0-4 cards in ♠. Opener rebids ............1NT, NF with 4 cards in spades ............2m, 3+ cards (just like after a 1NT forcing) ............2H, 6+ cards (just like after a 1NT forcing) ....1NT = 5+ ♠ unlimited ....2/1 GF So if opener has 44 in the major (such as with the 4441 short in D), he can rebid 1NT if his pard responds 1♠.

If that's the worry, then better bid 2H for a Moysian fit. Some people play (not me) that 1NT can be a "desperation" bid, promising nothing at all. I do not like this, but anything is better than a penalty pass if holding 3 hcp ! :) Whatever your approach, JUST BID SOMETHING, and not pass a takeout by pard just because the choices are unappealing. Bidding whatever you like here is the least of evils if compared to an insane penalty pass :-)

Oh sorry, had not seen the double of 2 spades. Alright, with no gadgets here available to west (e.g. some lebensohlish tools, good bad 2NT etc), I agree that west's 3D is crazy.

I doid not like 3C by East. West's 2 spades bid, despite a free bid (and a slight overbid), shows only extra length, not extra hcp. A free bid of 3C after pard rebids freely spades (NF) should be constructive here, IMO, some kind of limit hands with, say, some 10 hcp with long clubs (I assume 2/1 GF here). I think that the 3D (bad) rebid by opener should be viewed like that: he assumed that 3C was a forward going move rather than a signoff offer. East has no longer any reason to keep the bidding open after the 2S rebid by opener, no game in sight, no reason to think that 9 tricks in clubs are easier than 8 tricks in spades. But the most important issue is that a 3-level partscore is much more likely to be doubled than a 2-level partscore. This hand risks a huge misfit, so settle for a 6-1 fit before it's too late. If they double 2S, then run to clubs, and pard won't misinterpret.

Well I am happy to know that most american players do not think that the rest of the world (and in particular the Blue Team) cheated. Reading some paragraphs of the books mentioned was sometimes quite irritating for the tone and the contents, and I was worried that - if not most american pros - at least quite a bunch of US players could at least share some of the views advertised by a few US top players. Perhaps I was misguided by some old threads I had read on rec.games.bridge. I am glad Justin is not among them. ;)

No, fortunately FIGB explicitly states that 5431 shape is allowed ;)

And I can see why (pard is more likely to xfer in our singleton). However, I want my 1-level openings to be lead-directing, I will never open 1 of a suit with Jxx or Qxx in the suit. With (41)35s my strategy shall be: - open 1D (steal a card) with HHx or better - open 1M (steal a card) with HHTx or better - open 2C with HHTxx or better - open 1NT with none of the above Alternatively, I am starting to understand why people play canapè MAFIA openings (Jimmy r u around ? ;) )

Looks playable, but I'm not in love with the preempts. I think there was some system that takes care of those strong 2-suiters. Maybe Ben remembers what it was... So my scheme would be: 2♦♥♠: Weak two 2NT: ♣ weak or strong ♥ + ♦/♠ 3♣: ♦ weak or strong ♣ + major 3♦: ♥ weak or strong ♦ + ♣/♠ Yes I know Misiry and I like it, but right now my pards seem to be more likely to accept the xfer openings at the 2 level rather than at the 3 level :-) I suspect it's just a matter of familiarity, oh well... ;) The 2-level opening scheme is currently being used by Facchini , an ex World Champion (or, perhaps should I write world champion, he was one of the "Soldier's Foot" pair...) into a scheme very similar to Polish Club. He includes in the xfer opening also good-ish one suiters and many minimum unbalanced hands. ========== However, for the purpose of this post, it's enough for me to know that giving up the 3 suiter and opening 1NT offshape more often is not a totally reckless strategy :)

The 3-suited 2H is part of the old scheme. The new scheme (shown at the bottom of the post) just gives up altogether any way to show a 3 suiter short in diamonds. That's the mai point of the post: how much we'll lose/gain giving up the 3 suiter short in D.