PrecisionL

Reask is Beta if 1st or 2nd response denied 3+ card support, otherwise it is a TAB for honors. We use none, Q / AK, K / AQ, A / KQ. This design is still in progress and testing. A new suit is a SAB-4 if the previous SAB-3 response denied 3+ card support with similar responses. Most 2nd suits are 5-4 or 6-4 hands as 5-5 hands are so rare.

Oh no, do NOT go to symmetric. We have worked out a very neat scheme based on frequency and parallelism in several similar auctions including 1M - 2♣ = A & G.F. e-mail me for more details. I'll have to clear it with my co-author, Keylime before responding. Our current version is not on-line, but the previous version URL is listed below as Ultra Club in my footnote to this post.

Meckwell down at the half in Bracket 1 by 30 IMPs, halfway through the second set of 12 boards started a rally with: A DOUBLE, DOUBLED PART SCORE IN A MAJOR MAKING for a 15 IMP swing!!! Jeff played 3 of a Major DOUBLED making and his teammates played 2 of the other Major DOUBLED making! Team: Carolyn Lynch, Mike Passell, Adam Zmudzinski, Jeff Meckstroth, Eric Rodwell, Cezary Balicki. 26 Brackets on Monday - Tuesday with Bracket 1 paying 57.54 Gold Points. (Reported to the author by Keylime who heard it straight from Eric.) Total Number of Tables - 8,549 through Saturday (Edited 2:54 pm EDT 4/17/11)

We (Keylime & me) used to play Transfer Precision with the acceptance of the Transfer being a Beta Ask for Controls. We could ask about the trump suit after finding out if there were enough controls for slam (10+ controls without a void or singleton). Then, new suits after setting trumps would be the Precision CAB ask. For the past 2 years we have been playing Transfer Precision with the cheapest bid by opener (after a positive response) being a relay for distribution. So we have now made distribution more important than Controls until enough information is discovered to try for slam with a Beta Ask. We also changed the responses to the Opener's new suit (by-passing the relay): 1st step 0-1 cards 2nd Step 2 cards exactly 3rd Step 3+ cards and 1-2 Controls (Beta Response) 4th Step 3+ cards and 3 Controls (Beta Response), etc. After a 1st step or 2nd step, a repeat ask in the same suit sets trumps and is Beta. We are very pleased with this design.

Some calculations are more "accurate" than others? I am sorry but this statement does NOT apply to these probability calculations of HCP. They can be calculated precisely, so your 'random' generation simulation appears to have an error. Not to split hairs, but 0.3639 % for zero hcp is correct. :<)

http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20020224061120/http://www.geocities.com/orient-bidding/Introduction.html Good luck The Original geocities site is no longer on the web. This is not a good system as every 1-level bid is artificial and shows only hcp, distribution is King!

Your hcp frequencies are inaccurate: 44.6 % 7 - 11 hcp 15.1 % 12 - 15 hcp 05.7 % 16 - 17 hcp 04.1 % 18+ hcp Reference: bridge odds complete, F. H. Frost, 1971, 2nd edition Edited: 4/2/11: My minor was math and statistics and I independently verified many of Frost's data before the age of electronic calculators (I used a mechanical calculator!). Something appears wrong with your 'random' generation. The Encyclopedia of Bridge also lists data that exactly matches Frost's publication.

There is no Universal Standard for Unusual Positives. A possible improvement on Precision Today's Unusual Positives: 1♣ - 3♣ = 4-4 in the majors and unknown minor singleton. Now, 3♦ asks for the singleton and 3♥ = 1♣ & 3♠ = 1♦. 1♣ - 3♦ = 4=1=4=4 Singleton ♥ (1-under) 1♣ - 3♥ = 1=4=4=4 Singleton ♠ (1-under) This allows for setting the suit being RKC and bidding the singleton as BETA for the number of controls.

Really? I don't think so, North has already doubled and his partner said he had a one suited hand. The second double is for PENALTY!

Pass. You have less than partner expects you to have and he did not double first. It is not a forcing pass situation in my partnerships.

Jumps later in the auction could be better used as mini-splinters and 4-7 hcp or fit jumps either of which tend to be more frequent than impossible negatives. It also good technique to use 1-under to show the singleton then the bid of the singleton can be Beta for Controls and a suit bid is RKC with that suit usually trumps (or the Q is missing in the opener's hand). Pay your money and take your choice for what is most important to you.

Another approach which I have used for 3 years: 1 ♣ - 2♥ = any 4441 hand. 2♠ asks for 1-under the singleton. 1♣ - 2♠ = 5440 with a 5-cd minor. 2NT asks for the minor, 3♣ = 5♣, 3♦ = 4=0=5=4, 3♥ = 0=4=5=4, and 3♠ = 4=4=5=0. Later bid of the singleton or void asks for Controls, suit bids below game are RKC.

PITBULLS: "Benito Garazzo is arguably the best Bridge theoretician the world has ever known. He writes in one of his books that describing suits is more important than any other aspect of Bridge bidding . Suits are more important than HCP’s , singletons , controls or any other aspect of Bridge bidding. I agree with him whole heartedly . Due to Charles Goren & Standard American , we are overly fixated on HCP’s . The 2/1 in competition for example announcing that you have 10 HCP is very misguided in my opinion. The 2/1 when not forcing to game , should be based on a suit , so HCP’s should have nothing to do with it." Thanks to the Alberta Bridge Site: http://www.pitbulls.shawbiz.ca/Coaches%20Corner/Theory/Hand%20Evaluation%20-%20Garozzo.htm My third generation Strong Club System (in cooperation with Keylime) uses transfers to suits and distributional bidding and asking before asking for controls or denial cue bidding. I recommend such an approach to save you years of learning the hard way - by experience.

Yes it does. Three books published in 50 - 70s & I own one. Several years ago I played the Nottingham Club AT the Nottingham Bridge Club in England!

I like 14-16 hcp for 1NT openings also. Another reason for playing 1NT rebid for balanced hands after opening 1♣ as 17-19 is to keep out the lead directing overcalls at the 1-level.

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).

Here are more opinions: :rolleyes: C. C. Wei in his Precision Newsletter of long ago after a study of World Championships: Bidding 75 % System 40% Partnership understanding 20 % Judgment 15 % Play of Dummy 10 % End play 3 in 100 hands Squeeze 1 in 100 hands Coups less than 1 in 100 hands Defense 10 % Expert: 1/2 trick per hand lost Above Avg: 3/4 trick per board Average 1 trick per board Below avg 1 1/2 trick per board Luck 5 % Ken Lindsay in the Mafia Club, 1981: Bidding Judgment = 50 % Defensive Play = 30 % Bidding System = 10 % Declarer Play = 10 % Wnen I became an ACBL Life Master in 2001 I kept track for 346 hands where my Precision Partner and I won or lost points playing only in pair contests: Bidding = 46 % Defense = 21 % Declarer Play = 17 % (Hopefully better 10 years later, :unsure: ) Luck = 11 % System = 4 % Lead = 1 % Benito Garozzo (World Class by Marc Smith, 1999): "In pairs competition, you can effectively forget about slam bidding. You need to concentrate on declarer play and defense - that is where most of the points are lost." Added 2/23/11 @ 9 am

Close, but 1♦ - 2♣ is 0-9 hcp pass or correct to ♦, N.F. 1♦ - 3♣ is 10-12 hcp pass or correct to ♦, G.I. If you want more details e-mail me off my profile.

I don't believe the odds favor bidding 2NT, I would reopen with a double to allow for the slim possibility that maybe partner had a trap pass or long clubs without 10 pts.

My partner's and I play a modified Jacoby 2NT in a Precision context: 4-card support and Game Invitational values or better. Opener rebids 3♣ with all minimums and now responder's 3M is a signoff. Opener's 3♦ indicates a non-minimum with an unknown minor suit shortness, now 3♥ by responder asks where and 3♠ indicates ♣ shortness and 3NT indicates ♦ shortness. A rebid of the other Major (after 2NT) indicates a non-minimum and shortness in that major. Max Hardy in his books recommended that 2NT be 15+ hcp, definite slam interest and opener's rebid follows classical Jacoby 2NT rebids.

Agreed, Dwayne and I don't use TABs, we use BETA (asking for Controls) instead. If there is still slam interest, we either use CABs (Control Asking Bids) or denial cue-bidding including trumps.

I have 3+ years experience playing an artificial 1♦ opening bid in ACBLand with our Transfer Precision System. 1M 0-13 pts does NOT work very well. We use 0-9 pts. 1NT 14+ is not recommended. We use 8-11(12) hcp. 1♦ - 2♦ is LR or better and may contain a 4-cd major to differentiate from 1M responses. 1♦ - 2M = LR only with 5M 1♦ - 2NT is G.F. asking if any shortage. 3♣ = no shortage, otherwise 1-under.

Since 1♦ has not taken up much room, we play systems on. Pass is either 0-5 hcp or 6+ hcp and their suit, X is no 5-cd suit and 6+ hcp. 1M is a transfer to the other major. 1NT and higher are transfers to a good 6-cd suit and positive. We have had several occasions when the double caught 1♣ opener with a penalty pass.

That was then (1975), this is now: ALERT! Other treatments? If extra distribution or strength is promised with a bid, then be safe and ALERT!

From the Bridge World: February 1971 Editorial: Commenting on the Omar Sharif Bridge Circus vs Aces Slam bidding of 840 boards (April 1970 BW Twenty-Six Slams): "After 840 boards, the Americans' overall [slam] bidding average was higher than that of their Blue Team Club opponents. "Hamman-Lawrence (Western style with 4-cd majors) consistently out-bid their counterparts, while Eisenberg-Goldman (Eastern style with 5-cd majors) had the best slam record we have ever seen over the last half of the match. So, practiced partnerships can be accurate in their slam bidding, even using Standard methods. "Still, we must point out this: today, four of the six Aces use the Blue Team Club." The Circus had seven different partnerships all playing BTC: Belladonna, Delmouly, Garozzo, Sharif, & Yallouze representing the Circus in various partnerships. Only Jacoby-Wolf of the Aces used BTC. In the April 1970 article, Blue Team Club was refered to as "the second-best slam bidding system in the world." What is the best? And the truth is that we have no pat answer. I remember that Edgar Kaplan had an article in the Bridge World where he said for an unknown Bermuda Bowl, the Italian Slam bidding was poor. In the 1961 Bermuda Bowl, the victors, the Italians gave their 1st place trophies to the USA team (including Howard Schenken) because the Italians had bid three grand slams that made (one on a finesse for a King) and had only one of them gone down, the USA would have won.