PrecisionL

Jeremy, Thanks for the post. This is all very interesting. I have been working on 1♣ - 1♦ sequences for months now and will be trying this scheme in 2010: 1♣ - 1♦: 1M = 4+ cards and one round force (Berkowitz-Cohen / Matchpoint Precision). Also includes 20+ balanced hands with better major. (i have been playing this part for over 3 years now.) 1NT = 17-19 2m = 16-19 hcp and 1-suited (not forcing) 2M = 16+ hcp and 2-suited with 5+M and 4+ in a minor (not forcing, more than 4 1/2 losers) 2NT = 16+ and 5-5 in the minors or better (forcing one round). 3X = 19+ and semi-solid suit or better asking for A cue or NT = K, or raise with neither (forcing one round). Larry

I think it is backwards. 1♣ - 1♥ should be 12+ hcp and all other bids are 8-11 hcp. This gives more space for slam auctions and gives the frequent and necessary distributional information for game investigation. Edited: 12/14 10:11 PM EST Some description of Meckwell Lite: http://www.bridgematters.com/bridgematters...or-younger.html

Isn't this Meckwell Lite? Now popular among youth and junior players?

I checked and they are identical wording.

I am an artificial system nut. Even when I play Goren (pre 1985), SA or 2/1, I add artificialities to bring it up to the precision of a Strong Club System. I like having better communications with my partner!

I play such a style also, it is winning pairs strategy. However, in pass out position I would pass without 4-4 in the unbid suits. Partner would have come in over 1♣ if he was short in clubs and had 3+ cards in the other suits. This is NOT the hand to double on even though partner might leave it in. This pre-alerting is nonsense. This is style and strategy well known.

For a definitive answer e-mail Mike Fladder, Associate National Tournament Director. rulings@acbl.org

As I read the ACBL GCC, if one of a major is 15+ HCP then conventional G.F. responses are allowed. And by inference a Herbert Negative (cheapest response). I admit that the legality of the Herbert Negative is not specifically stated, but neither is an artificial 1♥ negative response to a strong 1♦ opening bid (15+ hcp). ACBL GENERAL CONVENTION CHART: RESPONSES AND REBIDS 3. CONVENTIONAL RESPONSES WHICH GUARANTEE GAME FORCING OR BETTER VALUES. May NOT be part of a relay system. 7. ARTIFICIAL AND CONVENTIONAL CALLS after strong (15+ HCP), forcing opening bids and after opening bids of two clubs or higher. As Edgar Kaplan stated years ago we will soon lose the heart suit (after losing the 1♣ and then the 1♦ openings to artificiality). NOW IS THE TIME!? :lol: Larry P.S. I play a forcing 1♣ and a 98% forcing 1♦ opening bids. 1♥ response (to 1♦) is alerted as may have longer ♠s or occasionally be only a 3-card heart suit. The strength range is 0-9 hcp. Invitational hands respond 2♦, LR or better, may have a 4-cd major! PP.SS. Has anyone notice that #5. on the GCC has deleted the entry formerly allowing a 2♦ Opening with a minimum of 10 HCP and both majors? 12/2004 #520226

1♣ - 1♦ - 1♥: [Promising 4+♥ & 1 Round Force] 1♠ = 0-4 hcp & No Ace 1NT = 5-7 hcp & 5♣ or 5♠ [Toad Club idea] or 5♦ 2♣ = 5-7 & Balanced 2♦ = 5-7 & 3♥ 2♥ = 3-5 & 4+♥ 2♠ = 3-5 Any 4441 [Toad club Idea] / Mini-Splinter 2NT = 5-7 Fit Jump: 5♠ & 3+♥(Hxx) 3♣ = 3-5 & Fit Jump w 5♣ [Axxxx / Kxxxx] 3♦ = 3-5 & Fit Jump w 5♦ 3♥ = 6-7 & 4+♥ & balanced 3♠ = 6-7 Maxi-Splinter 3NT + = 6-7 & Fit Jumps Some Strong Clubbers use 1NT = 0-7 hcp & 4+♠

Don't forget Magic Diamond. Although the geocities sites are now extinct.

Well, I have a few strong diamond systems in my files .... It would help to know if this is for ACBLand play or elsewhere (if so what are the restrictions on responses?). The major problem is an artifical response of 1♥ as a negative response (just like a 1♦ negative response to a strong 1♣). Larry

I have played 1♣ - 1♦ - 1M rebid as 4+ cards and One Round Force for 10 years now. That is the recommendation written up in Match Point Precision, 1975 (Anderson & Wei) and One Club Complete, 1981 (Radin & Kathi Wei). Cheapest rebid by responder can be 0-4 hcp and all others 5-7. Berkowitz and Cohen have played 2♣ (0-2M) and 2♦ (3M) with 5-7 hcp. There are other artificial follow-ons for responder: 1NT comes to mind from Toad Club that is 5+ cards in a black suit and 2♣ = 5-7 hcp, no 5-card suit (balanced). 2♠ = any 4441 & 5-7 hcp. Also, some prefer 1♣ - 1♦ - 1♥ to be 19+ and balanced, or 4+♥ and 2-suited. Precision Today, 2002. Preference somewhat depends on style and Pairs or Teams. Larry

Quoting from WORLD CLASS by Marc Smith (1999), page 66: Benito Garozzo & Systems: "The Blue Club system that we played years ago just is not good enough for top-level today. ... The old system was based on controls, and it has taken me many years to realize that was wrong. The distribution is the most important thing and you should gear your bidding to concentrate on that first. ... First it should be distribution, and only when you know enough about partner's shape should you worry about controls." Enough said?

I agree. This is a simple raise with 1 trick and 3-4 trumps. Otherwise, responder bids 1NT with 2nd negative 0-4 and no trick. I don't think the 1♠ bid is limited to 19 pts in this Precision auction. Anderson - Wei and Radin - Wei (Kathy) used this approach and I still do after 10 years.

Yes, in ACBLand you may use 2♣ as an Artificial Game Force with or without clubs. You may NOT use a 2nd artificial reply (2♦?) as a Game Invitational hand. Larry 10/20/09 Edit: I forgot to include that this was from an e-mail: rulings@acbl.org

On the other hand, I prefer that the first step be a non-minimum (maybe 11+ hcp and 4+ Controls?) and pattern out all minimums. The lost step won't hurt when you know partner has a non-minimum. Using 2NT with 4+ trump support works OK, there are various schemes. You need the extra space when you don't know what the fit is (2♣ G.F. over 1M).

From my Bridge Library Collection: Contract Bridge Bidding and the Club Convention by Harold S. Vanderbilt Charles Scribner's Sons New York - London Published July, 1929 Reprinted August, 1929 $2.50 251 pages An enlargement of that work: The New Contract Bridge, Club Convention Bidding and Forcing Overbids, by Harold S. Vanderbilt, 1930, 333 pages.

If you do not like 1M forcing (which I have played for 10 years now) then you need to play 1♥ as 19+ Kokish style. See Adam Kaplan's system notes: http://docs.google.com/View?id=dfsxdknt_0t...b#_Toc240360575 Also see Dan Neils web page: http://bridgewithdan.com/systems/ Or, see my notes for Ultra Club [below] which uses 1♥ forcing with 4+♥ and 1♠ natural, but not forcing (Hmm, I think I now play that as forcing also!) Matchpoint Precision (Wei and Anderson) and One Club Complete (Kathy Wei + Radin) both used the 1M approach forcing with 4+ cards. Larry Edit 9/18/09 21:20 Another thread on same theme: http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=33857

Check out Dan Neils System Page: http://bridgewithdan.com/systems/ However, you will really want to start simple. Lots of used books on Precision abound by Goren, Reese, Jannersten, Wei. I particularly like One Club Complete by Radin and Wei (Kathy). Larry

Yes, Adam, our conclusion too. So we (Dwayne & I) now play 1♣ - 1NT = (a) 5-4 or better in the majors, or (b) 44 in the majors with a minor suit singleton and 11+ hcp. Our experience is that this maximizes not playing in NT and is easy to untangle (even if 4th hand interferes). Larry

NEITHER! The Poll needs a third option as I prefer to play neither Multi or Weak Twos as do some top players (see BB convention cards). We play constructive twos in all suits: 10-14 hcp and 6-cards if a minor without a 4-card major. 5332 or 6322 if the major is weak. Descriptive and semi-preemptive with some defense. However, see Fred's post on weak twos when he was playing with Ekeblad - Rubin. Larry

I have played a version of a strong club with transfer responses where we used the acceptance of the transfer as a Beta ask for controls. Then we graduated to transferring to 4-card majors and 5-card minors or NT with Beta asks. Then we graduated to having the transfer acceptance be a relay for distribution and a later bid (usually at the 3-level) be the Beta ask. This worked out much better. Now, we play ... oh, well enough of this. :P

In our Copious Canape Club System [ultra Club Improved!], we are now trying to merge the old Matchpoint Precision approach of 1♣ - 1♦ - 1♥ showing 4 or more ♥s (forcing for one round) with the modern approach of using the 1♥ Relay ALSO for balanced 20+ hcp hands. This is tough to sort out because of the possibility of opener having 4 or 5♥s. One solution is to use the Toad Club approach where the 1NT rebid by responder shows 5-7 hcp and either 5♣ or 5♠. However, this does not allow enough room to distinguish between 3 and 4-card ♥ raises [like Berkowitz-Cohen once did with 2♣ (0-2♥) and 2♦ (3♥ exactly)]. Does anyone have experience with this approach or ANY other ideas of making the 1♥ Relay multi-functional?

Russ E. www.usbg.org Does not have responses to 1♣ or 1♦. http://usbf.org/index2.php?option=com_teamforms&task=display&pop=1&page=0&fid=418&pid=131 Others: www.ecatsbridge.com http://www.ecatsbridge.com/documents/docdefault.asp?page=ConventionCards Can't provide any more information as question needs to be more specific about players.

Long match wins hands down. In the 1970 World Championship, North America vs. Nationalist China, the Final was played in 4 sets of 32 boards with Victory Points awarded for each set of 32 boards. This was the only time this was attempted in the World Championship final. With the match 3/4 complete, NA was leading 45 - 13 in V.P. a difference of 32 V.P. and the match was over! China could not win as the biggest score they could achieve in the 4th quarter would be to win by over 100 IMPs (old scale) and the V.P. conversion would be 20 vs -5 for a difference of 25 V.P.