1D - 2D in Precision

[bob100147]

I was wondering if anyone knows anything about the way Greco-Hampson and Meckstroth-Rodwell play the sequence 1♦-2♦. As I understand things 1♦-2♦-2♥ shows a balanced 11-13 and 1♦-2♦-2♠ shows a four card raise with shortness somewhere. Is this right? What are the follow-ups? What is 1♦-2♦-2NT? Is this written up anywhere?

[straube]

Buyer beware. The following is based on Meckwell notes that are over 15 years old. As I didn't have the complete notes, it is probably corrupted with my own guesses. Hopefully someone can offer you better.

 

 

1D-2D, 2H=bal with 2 or 3 diamonds

 

2S-forces 2N

.....2N-forced

..........3C-# diamonds ask

..........3D-f, 5 clubs

..........3M-short M

2N-f, four clubs

3C-nf, 5/5

3D-nf, six diamonds

3M-4M/6D

 

1D-2D, 2S=four diamonds with shortness

 

2N-relay

.....3C-club shortness

..........3D-size ask

.....3D-heart shortness

.....3H-spade shortness

 

3C-5/5 minors, nf

3D-nf

3M-4M/6D

 

1D-2D, 2N=five diamonds, balanced or with shortness

 

3C-relay

.....3D-balanced

.....3H-club shortness

..........3S-size ask

.....3S-heart shortness

.....3N-spade shortness

3D-nf

3M-4M/6D

 

1D-2D, 3C=(41)-3-5

.....3D-nf

.....3H-asks for major

..........3S-1435

..........3N-4135

 

1D-2D, 3D=2-2-4-5

 

1D-2D, 3H/S/N=void club/heart/spade

[bob100147]

Buyer beware. The following is based on Meckwell notes that are over 15 years old. As I didn't have the complete notes, it is probably corrupted with my own guesses. Hopefully someone can offer you better.

Thanks very much - this is very helpful.

[bluecalm]

It's important that they play that with 5m-4M they respond 1M so they don't need to worry about those hands after 1♦ - 2♣/♦.

 

After 1♦ - 2♦

Opener has following hands to worry about:

 

-11-13balanced

-splinter in diamonds (weak or strong)

-6m-4M

-(4-1)-3-5 (weak or strong)

-2-2-(4-5) (weak or strong)

 

They way Meckwell handle this is described by Straube. I don't like that range for splinters are not split (so we can't stop in 3m comfortably) also I don't like that range is not split for (4-1)-3-5 hands.

This is the structure I came up with:

 

1♦ - 2♦

2♥ = 11-13 bal

2♠ = minimum with 4+♦ unbal (M shortness or 2-2-(4-5))

2NT = (4-1)-3-5 then relay asks and answers are min/min/max/max

3♣ = ♣ shortness, min

3♥/3♠ = splinters, max

3♦ = 2-2-4-5/2-2-5-4 max

3NT = club shortness, max

 

after 2♥:

2♠ = pupper to 2NT -> 3♣ = GF+ with 5♦-4+♣; 3♦ = signoff; 3♥/3♠ = SI with 6m-4M; 3NT = to play

2NT = GF with ♦ follow ups natural

3♣ = GI with 5♦-4+♣ passable

3♦ = invite; 6+♦

3♥/3♠ = GF (but not SI) with 6m-4M

 

after 2♠:

2NT = ask; ...3♣/3♦ = 2-2-4-5/2-2-5-4; 3♥/3♠ = splinters min

3♣/3♦ = to play

3♥/3♠ = whatever you want, 6-4 SI or splinter

 

 

In this structure you have fast min/max information which I like. You can introduce auto splinters by responder after 2♥ at the cost of not differing between 6m-4M GF and SI.

If you open 1NT with every 2-2-(4-5) 14-16 you can change direct 3♦ response to 5♦ bal, 11-13.

[awm]

There are a number of issues with bluecalm's structure especially.

 

(1) What happened to the 6+♦ one-suited hands? I believe Meckwell open 1♦ with these.

 

(2) It is important to show responder's splinters when opener has the balanced hand, because this often effects the playability of 3NT and prospects for a thin 6♦ contract. This structure has 1♦-2♦-2♥ showing the balanced hand, but then the follow-ups distinguish between 4-6 SI and 4-6 GF without having any direct way to show 6♦(331) type hands and look for the best game or slam.

 

(3) There are a lot of wrong-sided notrump contracts. Typically when one person has a singleton and the other has a balanced or semi-balanced hand, you want the balanced hand declaring 3NT to protect against the lead of the singleton suit. Yet we have 1♦-2♦-2NT showing a singleton major without even a real diamond fit (wrong-siding the likely 3NT) and also 1♦-2♦-2♥-2NT as apparently the only call with an unbalanced diamond game-force (also wrong-siding a likely 3NT).

[straube]

I think this is more pure Meckwell...

 

1D-2D, 2H=bal with 2 or 3 diamonds

 

2S-forces 2N

.....2N-forced

..........3C-# diamonds ask

..........3D-f, 5 clubs

..........3M-short M

..........3N-short C

..........4C-short C, bigger

2N-nf, doesn't mind declaration, shows diamond suit

3C-nf, 5/5

3D-nf, six diamonds

3M-4M/6D

 

1D-2D, 2S=four diamonds with shortness

 

2N-relay

.....3C-club shortness

..........3D-size ask

.....3D-heart shortness

.....3H-spade shortness

 

3C-5/5 minors, nf

3D-nf

3M-4M/6D

 

1D-2D, 2N=five diamonds, balanced or with shortness

 

3C-relay

.....3D-balanced

.....3H-club shortness

..........3S-size ask

.....3S-heart shortness

.....3N-spade shortness

3D-nf

3M-4M/6D

 

1D-2D, 3C=(41)-3-5, GF

.....3D-relays

.....3M-4M/6D

 

1D-2D, 3D=2-2-4-5

 

1D-2D, 3H/S/N=void club/heart/spade

 

 

I don't understand how they handle 5D/4C hands. I don't know what they do with (41)-3-5 hands that are minimum.

[straube]

There are a number of issues with bluecalm's structure especially.

 

(1) What happened to the 6+♦ one-suited hands? I believe Meckwell open 1♦ with these.

 

(2) It is important to show responder's splinters when opener has the balanced hand, because this often effects the playability of 3NT and prospects for a thin 6♦ contract. This structure has 1♦-2♦-2♥ showing the balanced hand, but then the follow-ups distinguish between 4-6 SI and 4-6 GF without having any direct way to show 6♦(331) type hands and look for the best game or slam.

 

(3) There are a lot of wrong-sided notrump contracts. Typically when one person has a singleton and the other has a balanced or semi-balanced hand, you want the balanced hand declaring 3NT to protect against the lead of the singleton suit. Yet we have 1♦-2♦-2NT showing a singleton major without even a real diamond fit (wrong-siding the likely 3NT) and also 1♦-2♦-2♥-2NT as apparently the only call with an unbalanced diamond game-force (also wrong-siding a likely 3NT).

I agree.

 

I also wanted to point out that Meckwell pays a price for including 4M6D hands in its 2D response (as opposed to MAFIA style). This might be best illustrated with the 1D-2D, 2H-2S forcing 2N. This puppet equals sequence loss but it's needed to leave space for responder to show the 6D4M hand patterns. Another illustration would be the (apparent) difficulty they have in showing 5D/4C hands. Perhaps they have a solution for that, but it seems like space is very tight.

[bluecalm]

(1) What happened to the 6+♦ one-suited hands? I believe Meckwell open 1♦ with these.

 

Yeah, I was tweaking it so many times and forgot about this basic hand type (6+diamonds without shortness) probably because it doesn't come up too often in generated hands. I will have to improve it.

 

(2) It is important to show responder's splinters when opener has the balanced hand, because this often effects the playability of 3NT and prospects for a thin 6♦ contract. This structure has 1♦-2♦-2♥ showing the balanced hand, but then the follow-ups distinguish between 4-6 SI and 4-6 GF without having any direct way to show 6♦(331) type hands and look for the best game or slam.

 

I am not sure. After GF is established we can just bid 3rd suit and avoid 3nt having xxx to x etc. I wasn't sure what is more important (GF/SI with 6m-4M or splinter from responder hand). I wouldn't be surprised at all if you are right that splinter are more important.

 

(3) There are a lot of wrong-sided notrump contracts. Typically when one person has a singleton and the other has a balanced or semi-balanced hand, you want the balanced hand declaring 3NT to protect against the lead of the singleton suit. Yet we have 1♦-2♦-2NT showing a singleton major without even a real diamond fit (wrong-siding the likely 3NT) and also 1♦-2♦-2♥-2NT as apparently the only call with an unbalanced diamond game-force (also wrong-siding a likely 3NT).

 

Yes, I agree that those are problems. Meckwell uses 1♦ - 2♦ - 3♣ as (14)35 but I find it difficult to bid without known range.

 

Thanks for comments. I see this sequence needs more work from me. Once I come up with something which seems to work and don't have above mentioned problems I will post here :(

Btw, it seems that in most precision writeups authors take simplistic view in 1♦ - 2♣ and 1♦-2♦ sequences (like 2♥/2♠/2NT being natural etc.). Do you know of any other structure which is playable here besides Meckwell ?

[straube]

Btw, it seems that in most precision writeups authors take simplistic view in 1♦ - 2♣ and 1♦-2♦ sequences (like 2♥/2♠/2NT being natural etc.). Do you know of any other structure which is playable here besides Meckwell ?

 

You first have to decide what a 1D opening promises (2+?) and then you have to decide what a 2D response shows and then you have to arrange your structure accordingly. Imo, it's a huge mistake to respond 2m with 4M/5m. It's arguable whether responding 2m with 4M/6m is better than a straight MAFIA approach.

 

Some will say that they want to show a 5m before a 4M so that they get their GF in and establish the relative length of suits. What they ought to do instead is develop better methods over 1D-1M, 1N (or other rebid).

 

Using natural rebids of 2N/2S/2N makes no sense to me. The goal should not be fit-finding in a major or using these bids to show/deny 4 of opener's 13 cards. I think you have to have some sort of relay bids to sort things out. Space is very tight. Placing opener's balanced hand rebid at 2H makes sense to me.

 

We use a 2D opening to show 6D and a 1D opening as ambiguous and we use MAFIA. After 1D-2D, we use 2H=bal, 2S=fit/unbal...just like RM Precision

[awm]

Well here's what Sam and I play. Our 1♦ doesn't show any diamonds; it's either a weak notrump or a three-suited hand (5431 okay but no 5cM) or a hand with both minors. We play MAFIA style responses so the 2m bids deny a four-card major and show invitational or better values. We also normally bid 2♣ with 5♦/4♣ hands.

 

1♦-2♣:

 

---> 2♦ = minimum, if 4-5♣ then will be balanced

---> 2♥ = unbalanced with 4-5♣ and shortness somewhere

---> 2♠ = 0-1♣, three-suited, maximum values

---> 2N = 2-3♣, balanced, maximum weak notrump

---> 3♣ = 4-5♣, balanced, maximum weak notrump

---> 3♦ = 5-5 or better in the minors, extras

---> 3M = four-card major with 4153 shape (5♦, 3♣, stiff other major), extras

 

1♦-2♦:

 

---> 2♥ = minimum, if 4-5♦ then will be balanced

---> 2♠ = unbalanced with 4-5♦ and shortness somewhere

---> 2N = 0-3♦, extras

---> 3♣ = 4-5♦, balanced, maximum weak notrump

---> 3♦ = 5-5 or better in the minors, extras

---> 3M = four-card major with 4135 shape (3♦, 5♣) and extras

 

After 1♦-2♣-2♦ or 1♦-2♦-2♥, the cheapest step is a GF relay and continuations symmetric with what's described above; rebidding 2NT or three of responder's minor is NF. After 1♦-2♣-2♥ and 1♦-2♦-2♠, the cheapest step asks for the shortage (high/mid/low) and three of the agreed minor is INV. After 1♦-2♣-2♦ specifically, 2♠ is "minor suit stayman" with 4-4 or better in the minors. After the specific sequence 1♦-2♦-2NT, 3♦ is a non-forcing invite (could be a misfit!) and 3♣ asks about diamond length in steps (note a minor two-suiter normally starts with 1♦-2♣).

[straube]

Very nice. We have to unwind opener's 6D/4M so...

 

1D-2C, 2D=4+ diamonds

.....2H-GF

..........2N-bal, diamonds

..........other=6D/4M

 

How do you open 6D/4M and how do you open 6D/5M?

 

I would like to put 6D/5S into our 1D opening but I think it will work better for us to open 1H with 6D/5H.

[awm]

How do you open 6D/4M and how do you open 6D/5M?

 

I would like to put 6D/5S into our 1D opening but I think it will work better for us to open 1H with 6D/5H.

We play 2♦ = 6+ diamonds and intermediate. We will open this with a 4-card major on the side, but rarely with a five-card major. While in principle it's possible to miss a major suit fit because of this opening, in practice we get a lot of good results in competitive situations through the intermediate two.

 

We normally open 1M with 5M-6m combinations. We have specialized rebids (usually 2NT which has no natural meaning) after a one-level response to show these hand types.