How Does Precision Reach Slam?

[Myrmidon73]

Well, I started reading about precision with the CC Wei book, and although I think he overemphasizes the benefits of his system, I thought the system was really interesting. So, I was trying to practice some big club openings, and I came across this. How does this hand get to slam in precision?

 

 

Hand 1:

 

S: A 10

H: K 9 8 6 5

D: v

C: Q J 10 9 8 6

 

 

Hand 2:

 

S: 9 7

H: A Q J 10 7

D: 10 9 6 5

C: A 7

 

I think this slam makes as long as they don't lead a spade, but even if they do, if the Kc is onside, you should still make it, as long as its not 4-0. But is going to slam the right call, or is stopping at 4H the better long-run play?

[helene_t]

Hi Myrmidon, welcom to the forum! If you want to study Precision, you should get a more contemporary book, like Berkowitz' "Precision today". You can learn Jannersten Precision in the Beginner/Intermediate lounge of BBO (OliverC teaches). The BBO default Precision convention card is based on Wei.

 

I don't think it matters too much in this case whether you play standard or Precision. At least if Hand 2 opens, it will be 1♥ in either case. The auction could be as simple as

1♥-4♦ (splinter)

6♥

or maybe South will check keycards and/or spade control first, or North may bid via 2♣

 

If North opens, he may opt for 1♥ which S will raise with a Jacoby 2N, and N will show his diamond shortness. In standard methhods, North may open a natural 1♣:

1♣-1♥

3♦-6♥

[keylime]

If North opens:

 

2C* (6+ clubs, or 5+ clubs with side major) - 2D* (asking)

3H* (shows x-5-x-6) - 4C* (provisionally sets trumps)

4D* (cuebid) - 4H* (cuebid)

4S* (cuebid) - 6C

 

If South opens:

 

1H - 2C

2D - 2H

3C - 3S

4C - 4D

4H - 5H

5NT - 6C

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

the only problem you may face is,

that after a 1H opening the other guy

makes a "lazy" sign of bid since opener

is limited. I am not able to comment

on the likelyhood, but it can happen.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Echognome]

What's the real hand 2? It's tough to know how to bid 2=5=4=3s.

 

Not a criticism, I'm just wondering what card shouldn't be there.

[helene_t]

lol Gnome

 

Reminds me on an incident at my father's club. Someone played 7♠ (undoubled!) lacking ♠A. He made his 13 tricks, the defender with ♠A saved it for the 14th trick. The TD ruled result stands.

[keylime]

Gnome, they were playing bridge with a wild card, remember? B)

[skjaeran]

What's the real hand 2?  It's tough to know how to bid 2=5=4=3s.

 

Not a criticism, I'm just wondering what card shouldn't be there.

The same goes for hand 1.

I've got no method to show 3-5-0-6 either. B)

 

Of course the slam is laydown, since you can afford to lose two tricks and still make 12 yourself. :)

[skjaeran]

lol Gnome

 

Reminds me on an incident at my father's club. Someone played 7♠ (undoubled!) lacking ♠A. He made his 13 tricks, the defender with ♠A saved it for the 14th trick. The TD ruled result stands.

The same happened in my old club, only this guy had only 13 cards from the start! What happened was that he saved the trump ace. During play he happened to NOT play any card to a trick somewhere in mid-play. Thus, he still held the trump ace when the 13th trick was finished. Law 67 B say that under such circumstanses, the extra card should be "played" to the defective trick (that containing only 3 cards) without affecting the outcome of the trick. So, no trick to the trump ace! B)

[Echognome]

Actually this hand reminds me of the book Gamesmanship. Where the author says to unnerve your opponents, deal yourself, say 17 cards and your partner 9. Then overbid wildly until you get doubled. Then as dummy lays down their deficient hand have a lively post mortem.

 

"I just had to bid more with my 7-5 hand."

"Well how could I not bid more with my three singletons?"

[kenrexford]

This also reminds me of a debate that I won.

 

An old partner of mine thought Losing Trick Count was stupid, because he counted winners. So, when he showed a nine-winner hand, I placed the contract at slam because of my assured three covers. Down one!

 

Of course, partner had nine winners, but he had five losers. Losing Trick Count was vindicated! No other approach handles 14-card hands as well.

[Myrmidon73]

Sorry i messed the original hands up guys. It was early morning, and I was still tired. I was dealing two hands from a deck, and I guess I counted a black 5 twice. My mistake.