Vilgan

Book review for: Enhanced Precision (Second Edition) by Ron Beall Year of publication: 2008 I grabbed this from our local bridge bookseller as he thought of me when he got it in and saved me a copy. It is a small $10 booklet that essentially just condenses down the system notes of the author into a useable form for others to read. Review: At first, I thought this was a total waste of $10. Most of it was familiar material (he takes forever to describe XYZ, without actually stating it is XYZ). Some parts of his system I thought were absolutely wretched and would never play them in this life. However, after I continued reading and actually read it all from cover to cover I did find some good insights/ideas in there. Some of the stuff is more modern/improved over other precision material that is available. It is especially good (I think) for matchpoint precision players which I think is great. There are some various ideas in the book that I will be discussing with my main precision partner to see what he thinks, and we might incorporate a few of them. So... if you are someone looking to learn precision: Do not get this book. It is not good intro material for someone interested in precision. Not only does it have some holes/bad bidding things (imo only) but it is also only a long list of what each bid means in sequence. There is no explanation of the thought behind it. That won't matter to the experienced precision player, but it does make it less appealing to a new precision player imo. If you already play precision of some sort, I think this booklet would probably be worth the $10 it costs to see if it has new ideas you might incorporate into your current system. There are very few modern precision books (2? 3??) so its probably worth grabbing and perusing. Overall grade: B. Good for people already playing precision who might gain some new things to incorporate into their system from the book. Not so useful for anyone else. Still cool to see *some* sort of precision stuff coming out though :P

I think this falls in fairly typical appeal without merit territory. X was swinging, XX got you the just reward. XX can be a lot of things here. You made a risky X, it blew up, not your opps fault.

I was way stoked when I found a similar play myself. However, I knew from the auction that stuff wasn't splitting so I had extra clues on the safety play whereas you were able to find the play without info. Definitely a fun one, and one that is not intuitively obvious at first B)

Could anyone recommend a good book on when to cover, and when not to cover? Declarer and defense, declarer probably more relevant atm though. Friend of mine who is semi new to the game is having real issues with this and I am not doing a good job of explaining it. My reaction has always just been to think about it logically and make the right choice, but I am having trouble communicating the process in a way she "gets". Anyways, just thought I would see if there is a book out there for this. It seems simple, but for some reason she is having real issues with it that I am having trouble resolving in a satisfactory way.

Nifty topic. Why I still suck: Trouble focusing at the table and away. I rarely miss the first discard, but the other methods of communication I will miss if I am not paying attention. Away from the table.. I can read a book cover to cover if it is engaging. However, "dry" bridge books take me a while to read and I don't get as much from them as I could if I actually focused the whole time. If I could take a pill and suddenly concentrate better, my game would greatly improve. Issue breaking through the plateau from intermediate/advanced into the semi expert realm. Lots of expert type agreements/knowledge that I have trouble finding good sources on. The only "pro" in the state still believes in opening with 13+ HCP and is not fond of any modern styles of bidding. Needless to say, he has not gotten in the ballpark of winning anything in his life. Distance: favorite partner is like 3 hours away. So since I get very little benefit from online play, how we improve has gone in fits and spurts as we do and don't have time to play together at tournaments.

I think you have W and E confused. E was the one who dealt and opened a diamond and is likely ??55. Seems like you are making good inferences, just got E/W flip flopped.

One might think they would at least limit it to the final day when stuff *really* matters. Carryover is nifty and all, but it is a lot less relevant than cheating that may or may not be going on in the final 2 sessions. Not to mention it would greatly reduce the amount of "huddled masses" that would be impacted by a rule that has nothing to do with them anyways. LoL's who cannot make it past day 1 of a national event are not going to be hiding in the bathroom reading a text message about board 12.

would follow the same auction myself in 2/1. In precision, the auction is different and it is much likelier we would play clubs. However, after finding out about missing the K of clubs and A of spades, we would likely end up just playing 5♣. If it was nearing the end of the event and I felt like I was doing okay but nothing awesome... I would likely bid 6♣ to try for another jump in imps.

A confident 5♥ for me. If I debate for a second or two, maybe LHO will feel more confident about an X (when it is right for him to do so). Could be wrong, and on a bad day I will go for 1100. However, 5♥ is the call I would make at the table.

They have been "working on" adding a forum to the bridgeiscool website for 2.5 years now. They claim, however, that it is a complicated process and one they want to take the time to do right. I think anyone with webpage experience can see the ludicrousness of that statement.

I'm confused as to why it is impossible for RHO to be 3433. Its unlikely, but certainly possible given the bidding. At the table I would likely play the AK of spades and lead a heart towards the K. Not sure if leaving the Q of spades as a non roughing entry is "necessary" but it seems like a good idea anyways in case I get hearts wrong and lose 2 of them. Even if LHO has Jx of hearts and Txx of spade (although that isn't the case) I think I still make as they cannot get back to RHO's hand to rough a heart continuation. Be interesting to see what the technically correct way is. This is just how I would approach the hand.

I emailed him about the ban and about another issue that was a bit more pressing. 0 response from him.

Could it be? A unanimous poll? :P Lemme guess, there was a hesitation and passout seat X'd back in?

This isn't really the ideal place to ask this. However, it is slightly time sensitive and I got the answering machine at Memphis. Issue: There is a director who directs a handicapped game at our club. He has had a long string of inappropriate action/harassment. Last night at the handicapped game, one pair he dislikes popped up with an ~4 point handicap. The handicaps of every other pair in the room (including a pair who frequently wins and always scratches) varied from 16 to 40+. The handicap style is the one where it bases your handicap on past performances (last 3 games I believe). The last 3 games of both people in the pair were above average but nothing exception (mid 50's). When confronted about it, he claimed he did nothing wrong and that is what the computer printed out. How would a director modify/adjust/do something to make the handicap in this type of handicap game be lower than it should be? Unfortunately, he is by far the most experienced with ACBL Score in the unit and I have no real clue what he would have done or how to look for it. I can access the game file during the day game today as it should be still on the computer unless he deleted it. Would like to know what to look for so as there were some discontent at the game last night. This is also a bit more relevant as it is not the first time, and he is also an ACBL director who directs sectionals/regionals in the area and there is a sectional starting shortly. Thx for any help w/ figuring out how it might be done. I realize this thread probably does not belong on the bbo forum, and will request its deletion after we figure this out. Thanks for any help/ideas you might have :)

Eh? As an unpassed hand I agree 100%. As a passed hand (with all opps also being a passed hand), what is the advantage of this again? 3♠ with a semi balanced hand (since I apparently don't have a fit jump either) on 10-11 hcp seems silly. Why not bid 4♥ (obviously to make given the passed hand status of everyone)? Its not like my X card suddenly disappeared if they bid 4♠. Anyways, perhaps I am far off from standard here. At least we agree that 3♠ is a GF, but bidding it with some boring 10-11 hcp hand w/ trump support sounds does seem like it muddies the communication for when we do have a hand like the one in the OP. Or even a more mundane hand like x Qxxx AJxx KTxx where the shortness showing helps partner to judge that we should go to 5♥ and I don't have to just guess on my own when it comes back around to me.

Huh? This statement boggles my mind. Suggesting it does not create a forcing pass situation would be very very non standard. I think the main problem in this discussion is a misunderstanding of what 3♠ means here rather than anything else. 3♠ showed shortness and a heart GF. If the auction went: 1♥ p 3♠ 4♠ all pass, someone screwed up. Likewise, 1♥ 2♠ 3♠ 4♠ all pass is the exact same situation. If pass isn't forcing here, what is partner supposed to do if he is fine with 5♥ but wants to give you the option to double in case you are very defensive in the side suits? Double and hope you overrule him? Bid 5♥ and hope its right? The ability to have a partner discussion on this hand outweighs the advantage (is there any?) of allowing it to go all pass after 4♠. So yes, 6♥ becomes more tempting if you don't play the pass as forcing. But that is a serious system issue that needs to get fixed, not some great argument for why 6♥ is a great bid.

If there was a long hesitation, returning it to 6NT seems like the correct director decision.

Any comments on Washington Standard by Steve Robinson? Been told it is a good baseline for higher level 2/1, but never heard of it outside of that 1 person.

So.. having a partner discussion, and we are discussing responses after 1NT (weak) - X - p He likes the idea of playing all systems on here. Aka 1NT - x - p - 2♣ is stayman, etc. Having played weak NTs a lot, I really liked it when people did this against me. It seemed like we got either normal or good results against people who played this system. However, my personal sample size is somewhat small (maybe 10 times?) so definitely not ironclad. From those with more experience, do the advantages of playing systems on (for example, finding 4-4 fits) outweigh the disadvantages?

My thoughts exactly.

This. This should not be "ooh, I just had a minimum Jacoby and don't want to cue bid". This should show "eek, my hand sucks now". Hence, pass is ez. If not playing some sort of serious/non serious 3 NT after Jacoby, that is a problem.

Pass. Pard could have pass/pulled if they wanted to invite slam. My void is nifty but I don't have much more (if any) than has been shown already.

I would return the J of diamonds I think. If I am going to leave open the possibility that partner has a doubleton and an entry, I need to tell him where my entry is. It sounds like declarer having Qx of diamonds is not possible given the lead of the 5. If it is possible for declarer to have Q6 of diamonds, I have to lead the 8 back. Heart return could easily be right. Part of my reasoning for a diamond is that with Axx of hearts, partner could likely have led hearts themselves (altho ATx might be hard to lead from).

I can think of 7 local players who quit shortly after hitting LM or scaled back their play significantly. Lots of people are goal oriented, and without a goal to work towards they are less inclined to put in time/money/effort. Admittedly, the "point" is to have fun and enjoy ourselves. However, from a participation and revenue aspect, losing players is never a good thing imo. Friend of mine is a fairly standard example: She retired from her engineering/management position a few years ago at 53. She started looking for things to do and got into party bridge. Then she found duplicate, and for ~2 years she played a LOT as she accumulated her gold/silver/black and total points to hit 300 points. Along the way she also won the district NAP B's (aka not a clueless LoL). Since hitting LM she has reduced her play considerably to about 1 time per week (with many weeks where she plays 0 times) and 0 out of town tournaments. She still enjoys the game, but her energy is now focused on improving her golf game and getting into the 90 stroke area. The main issue is that she (and lots of others) are goal oriented. She put lots of energy into bridge while there were goals looming. Once she hit the LM goal, the next goal was unattainable (National event win) so she moved on to other interests. Anyways, long/verbose response. But I did feel that stating that only a tiny few people quit due to the system is not an accurate statement.

Aren't score files from regionals kept in Memphis? I know we have all our club games going back ages, sort of figured the ACBL would do the same with the regional files. If so, writing a program to parse all of those files and add "regional wins" to each person as appropriate would not be hard. If the game files of old regionals are not stored, it would be pretty much impossible.