PrecisionL

It is an improvement and I have been playing such for many years. :( The 1♦ core is based on the book: The Diamond Major by Peter Oakley, 1998. Excludes balanced hands. Available on the web: http://www.bridgeclublive.com/Include/Diamond.htm Also, The Millennium Club keeps 5M out of the strong 1♣ bid. Web for similar system: http://www.geocities.com/col3435/index.html Larry

I currently use tranfer responses over a Precision 2♣ opening (denies a 4-cd major): Accept with xxx or Hx, sometimes with xx if min and unbalanced. Some authorities don't allow the transfer (ACBL). Works reasonably well.

The Relay Club by S. G. Bose Mullick, 1975. Author lived and played bridge in India. Good discussion of Canape. 23 pages on interference. Strong 1♣ = 17+

C. C. Wei analyzed World Championship hands before deciding on Precision and the results were printed in the Precision Club Newsletter. Also, Ken Lindsay (3D and the MAFIA Club, 1981) studied W.C. hands and made his own analysis: Wei Lindsey Me (345 ACBL club hands) Bidding 70 % 50% 46% Defense 10 % 30% 21 % Opening Lead 1 % Declarer 10 % 10 % 17 % Play Luck 5 % - 11 % System 5 % 10% 4 % Larry

Hi Ed, doing OK. Yes, I have all of the Romex books. Interesting, never found anyone to play and still prefer Transfer Strong Club (a la Sabine Auken). Larry

In ACBLand, yes. In fact I usually ask for no alerts when playing against unusual systems. And since I play a Transfer Strong Club System, I always pre-alert although some opponents tell me I don't have to and they don't care to hear the alerts. Also we play unusual cue bids, so we alert them also (touching suits of the cue bid). Larry

True, but isn't frequency of the opening also a criteria for choosing 2-bids @ pairs. Probability of 2 card support (or better) for 6-card suit = 76.3 %. Prob of 3-card support (or better) = 42.7 %. Prob of 4-card support or better = 15.0 %. Prob of 5-card support (or better) = 3.0 %. Perhaps a better comparison (hard to calculate) is the 8+ card fit for either of the 4-4 suits. Larry

I once tried the exercise of determining the probability of finding a 7-card or better fit when you hold two 4-card suits. My calculations (which might be in error) said this is true 67% of the time. Occasionally it is not in one of your 4-card suits. Someone can correct me if they have better information. From BRIDGE ODDS COMPLETE by Frost, Kibler, Telfer, and Traub (2nd ed, 1971): Odds of 3-card support for one of the 4-card suits in a 4432 hand = 91.8 % Odds of 4-card support for one of the 4-card suits in a 4432 hand = 60.3% And if partner does NOT have 3-card support, then he is 2254 or more unbalanced and you still have a 7-card fit in one or both of his suits. Amazing, I am switching today!!! Also, 54xx (x <4) distributions occur 2.6 more frequently than 6-card suits (with no other suit longer than 3). If you consider only 6-card majors and any 5-4 then the ratio is 2 x 2.6 = 5.2 more frequent. Larry

Playing a Strong club and canape system we have played 2M = 5332 (MPs) or 5M & 4+♣ (IMPs) 10-14 hcp. 2 of a minor was usually 6 cards, sometimes 5-4 and 10-14 hcp (without Hxxx in a major). Both worked well at IMPs. 5-6 IMP swings when opponent's get too high or in the wrong suit. However, 5M332 were troublesome hands in our system. We (Dwayne and I) don't miss weak 2-bids in the majors. Larry P.S. System note url below includes 2M = 5332 / 5224♣ only. Addition 10/8/08: Bridge World, October 2008, pg. 26 FREQUENCY vs. EFFICIENCY by Danny Kleinman "The fundamental theorem of method selection is that there are tradeoffs. One is between frequency and efficiency. When Edgar Kaplan noted, in a 1958 essay [sorry my collection does not go back that far - LPL], that the weak two-bids used by Americans in world championships lost imps, he neglected to mention one of the reasons: their use on too many (and thus some inappropriate) hands. .... a consequence of permitting them [5-card weak two's at favorable vulnerability - LPL] routinely is that more than two-thirds of one's weak two's will deliver only five cards in the bid suit ... creating insoluble problems for responder in competitive auctions"

Me too! Robert J. Danielson's RELAY PRECISION, 1977, 129 Tracy Place, Hackensack, NJ 07601 Book 2: Higher Rebids & Interference Book 4: Minor Suit & Special Responses Book 5: The Catch-All 1 Diamond Bid Interesting for the Challenge the Champs examples. I have not used any of his ideas, I prefer Transfer Responses. Larry

Here is the ULTIMATE CLUB Scheme for showing two suiters (5-5 or better): 1♣ - 1♦ - : 2♠ = ♠ +♦ 2NT = ♣ + M (3♦ asks for the M) 3♣ = ♣ + ♦ 3♦ = ♦ + ♥ 3♥ = ♥ + ♠ None of these bids is forcing; further bidding is natural. However, after 1♣ - 1♦ - 1♥ - 1♠, or 1♣ - 1♥, or 1♣ - 1♠, then the same sequences above apply with the loss of 2♠ (which would be natural) and then 3♠ = ♠ + ♦ Larry

Sure, ENHANCED PRECISION, by Ron Beall, 2008, 44 pages, $9.95 Baron-Barclay: It is difficult to summarize what is enhanced as the openings are similar to Wei's initial system: 1♣ 16+ hcp, strong, artificial, forcing (17%) 1♦ 2+♦ 11-15 hcp (32%) 1♥/♠ 5= cards, 11-15 hcp (26%) 1NT 14-16 hcp, no 5-cd M, (13%) 2♣ 5+♣, 11-15 hcp (3%) 2♦ 3-suited short in ♦, 11-15 hcp (1%) 2♥/♠ weak 2 bid, 7-10 hcp (3%) 2NT 5-5 in the minors, 6-8/8-10 hcp (1%) 3X Standard preempts (3%) 3NT 8+ minor not head3ed by AK 4m 8-9 tricks in ♥/♠ (1%) 4M not good enough to open 4m (1%) Transfer positives are used as well as TAB, SAB, BETA (modified), SCAB, DAB, etc. Also Unusual Positives for 4441 hands (singleton unknown) Larry

Interesting. There are three main ways of designing follow-ons to transfer responses to a strong ♣: (1) Natural with or without asking bids and / or strength showing / asking - enough said. (2) The PRECISION TODAY method: acceptance is a BETA ASK for the number of A & K. Thus, the need for knowing responder's hcp range is mostly answered with this Beta response (except for Queens). I played that style for 18 months and did well. (3) RELAY method: Keylime and I now play Ultra Club (1 year) where the cheapest bid by the 1♣ opener to a transfer positive is a relay to ask for more distributional information. Beta Asks are now delayed until the 3-level, usually. We found that this works even better for game bidding and still is powerful for slam investigation. For efficiency reasons we made the 1♥ and 1♠ positive responses as showing 4-cards in the other major or better [sabine Auken like] without 4-cards (or more) in the bid major. Our Smolen-like design uses the 1 NT response for all hands with 5-4 or better in the majors. Continuing, 1♣ - 2♣: is the G.F. response with one or both minors (5-4 or better). And the 2♦ positive response has the 8-14 hcp NT hands. Responses of 2M are natural with 5332 distribution. The 2NT response is 15+ hcp (Power Precision). Responses at the 3-level are reserved for the 4441 hands. Rarely do we find an auction where the 8-11 or 12+ positive declaration would be more helpful. Larry Edited 8/29/08 16:26 EDT - Ultra web page does NOT have 1 NT response in it showing both majors (5-4+)

I had assumed that we were discussing a Transfer Walsh type framework NOT a defense structure after a strong club opening followed by a GF positive. Silly me, transfer responses to a natural 1♣? Why would I think the 1♣ would be strong (15+ hcp?). Maybe because it wasn't clear in the original post? And I live and play in ACBLand where transfer responses to 1-bids are ONLY allowed over a strong 1♣ in non-competitive auctions? Anyway, my comments in 4th seat are still applicable, and if 1♦ shows hearts, then double shows diamonds and 1♥ is takeout for the other 3-suits. Larry

I hate to add what we play, you might use it against me :) . In 2nd seat (to 1♣) we use Bugatti. In 4th seat we use Mathe over 1♦ negative. Over 1♣ p 1♥: 1♠ is for takeout and X is hearts. 1NT and higher are transfers to the next highest suit. Having played a stong 1♣ for years, I only remember one time we didn't land on our feet after interference and that was the 1♣ opener's fault for not supporting my transfer suit with xxx. Larry

I, also, have tried many schemes including Rigal's suggestion that X shows 3-cards in the opponent's bid suit. I liked this scheme, but my partner did not: X = (1) 5-7 hcp & 3-cards in the suit bid, or (2) Positive response w 5-cards in suit bid. Suit = Natural and Game Forcing 1NT = Natural and Game Forcing Cue = (1) 5-7 hcp & 3-suited takeout, or (2) GF balanced & no stopper. Jump = Semi-positive & constructive If the interference is after responder's positive response, then Pass-Double Inversion works well. Currently I play (with Keylime) Transfer Lebensohl with X = 5-7 hcp and no long suit. Larry

Chris, Maybe you should add Millennium Club to your comparisons as it takes the 5M hands out of the 1♣ module unless 4 losers or less. In addition the responses to 1♣ are transfers to the above major. I have played this for 3 years now in pairs and prefer it over simple Precision. When I play a simple Precision with several partners, I make 1♦ opening promise a 4-card major and 2♦ is the long diamond hand. However, a complicated Precision, like Ultra or Jannersten, is still my first choice. I will be interested in your simulation results. Larry

In Ultra Club: After two or three relays, a bid at the 3-level of responder's major or at the 4-level of responder's minor is Beta (for A & K Controls). CAB or Turbo often follow Beta, and also serious 3nt. Opener can break relay at any time to ask support for one of his suits with the following responses: 1st step = 0-1 cards, 2nd step = 2 cards, 3rd step = 3+ cards and 1-2 controls, zooming to total responder controls. Opener can also break relay to start Beta earlier without complete distribution if so desired. Larry

And with Ultra Club: 1♣ (16+) - 1♠ (4+♥ & 8+ hcp) - 1NT (Relay) - 2♣ (Minor Canape) - 2♦ (Relay) - 2♥ (5+♣) - 2♠ (Relay) - 2NT (♦ shortage) - 3♣ (Beta) - 3♦ (1-2 Controls) 6♣ (must have at least 1 K (♠) & 2Qs & J minimum, protected) At worst 50%. Larry

Interesting, food for thought. There was another thread recently in this forum discussing F-N 2 bids. I have been playing (since 2000) 2♠/2♥ opening bids as 10 to a bad 14 and 5332 (no singleton) with 2 honors in the 5-card major. This works surprisingly well at MPs and IMPs. 2NT response is weak with 6♣ or GI or better with another suit. 2 over 1 responses are to play usually with singleton in major and 6-card suit. 3♣ response is G.I. with clubs & 10-11 good hcp. Recently, we changed to 5+M and 4+♣ at IMPs with 10-14 hcp to cover the 5-4 and 6-4 hands when playing a strong club so as not to miss light double fitting games. Larry

Bridge With the Blue Team by Forquet, 2000: 1NT: "This shows a balanced hand with 13-17 points. If the strength is 13-15 points, opener will hold length in clubs. Where the strength is 16-17 points, any balanced shape is permissible." They did not open 1♦ on a 2-card suit, thus 1NT. With 15 hcp and 3 diamonds, open 1NT per Reese in The Blue Club. Also: The Italian Blue Team Bridge Book by Garozzo & Forquet, 1969. Larry

Well, Keri over NT could work here (I have used it in my Precisions Systems). 1♣ - 1♦ - 1NT - 2♣ puppets to 2♦ and now responder bids 2M = GI and 4+ of the major. Opener passes with minimum and 3,4 card support, shows 4 spades with only 2 hearts, or bids 2NT with only 2 Spades, and now responder could theoretically bid 3m to play since the GF hands don't apply. Reference: Bid Better, Much Better After Opening 1NT by Ron Klinger. 2001. Two editions available weak or strong NT. Master Bridge Series. Larry

I also told Mr. Beye that I would someday like to be able to play transfer openings in a strong club system. He responded that this would be limited to SuperChart events and that it was "highly unlikely you will see these methods approved for Mid Chart events." He later told me that the method would be SuperChart because the "4+ cards in a known suit" rule was being removed from the mid-chart. Anyway, the "all-purpose" clause cannot be used to allow a 1♣ or 1♦ opening which promises 4 spades. And, it sure sounds like it is going to take quite some time before transfer openings are permitted at the mid-chart level (at least in a strong club system or in events with segments of less than 12 boards). Tim Oh, No! My favorite improvement to Precision is to play 1♦ as 10-15 hcp and at least one 4-card major, but no 5-card major. I suppose this will now be interpreted as a transfer opening. Rats! :huh: Now I will have to play 4-card majors as this solved the problem very nicely. Larry

Get 3 friends together and learn as a foursome. Then you have 3 partnerships for Precision. Rodwell has a 4 page outline on OKBridge of a simple version. Berkowitz-Cohen play a simple natural version and have done extremely well with it. Go to Daniel Neill's web page for about 6 versions of Precision. http://www.geocities.com/daniel_neill_2000/sys/ Larry P.S. Kathy Wei's and Judy Radin's book: PRECISION'S ONE CLUB COMPLETE might still be available at Baron-Barclay in paperback and I give a copy to all my new Precision partners. When you get really serious, then Rigal's Precision in the 90s and Precision Today by Berkowitz and Manley are cutting edge.

Last time in London, a couple of years ago, I could not find the Acol Club, it had moved off Acol Street. Larry