Hand evaluation question

[bearmum]

Hi all !!

Assume you have agreed:

1) to play Precision AND

2) over 1M opening you use

- 1NT forcing and

- 2/1 GF.

 

(I am sure the system you actually play is better than this ;) , but please just skip the description of what you play to avoid the type of problem arrsen from this type of hand, just mention what you would bid using the abovementioned constraints- e.g. assume someone is pointing a gun at you forcing you to play this lousy system agreement  :D )

 

Matchpoints, NS Vulnerable,

Dealer East

You are North and bidding goes

 

E    S    W    N

p  1♠  p  ?

 

You hold

♠3

♥J7

♦K98762

♣AT97

 

 

What do you bid ?

The only plausible bids allowed from system are 1NT (forcing) or pass.

No negative freebids or semipreemptive bids in minors available (again, please let's not discuss here how much other options would be good- let's just stick to the hand evaluation given only 1NT or pass as options :) ).

 

Thanks !! :)

HATE the "Precision" system with 2/1 GF (mainly because I thought all Precision openers except 1♣ and 2NT are limited to 15 points max :unsure:

 

SO I would PASS ---- because IMHO we will get into trouble more often than not if I make a forcing bid with the cards I have :P

[MickyB]

I think that responding without game interest is usually losing strategy playing Precision. You will play an occasional 5-1, but a fair proportion of the time passing will be best (usually playing a 6-1 at the 2 level instead of the 1 level). In return, these passes make later auctions easier, and allow opener to make penalty doubles.

Do you refer to IMPS play or Matchpoints ?

 

At MP my (very limited) experince has ben that pasing with semiconstructive hands has led to much more losses by letting opps compete easier for the partscore or even by mising games our way.

 

But I am certainly no guru ;)

Yes, I should have mentioned that, I am mainly referring to IMPs. I'm not sure to what extent my theory would hold true at MPs.

 

Bearmum - Precision with 2/1 actually works very nicely. The problem hands in the 2/1 system 15-18s facing 6-11s, too often you have to risk your part-score to find out if you have the values for game. Limited openers almost eradicate this problem.

[whereagles]

I realized that Precision works better with 4-card majors, as that allows for dumping the 2C opener into the 1D opening. The 1D would then show 4+ in one of the minors, which is easy to deal with, though it still requires a bit of homework.

[EricK]

I think Chamaco didn't hammer enough on the fact that someone is pointing a gun at his head, tells him to play this inferior system, and most important that he didn't want a discussion about how awful this system is and what you want to change about it.

In the given circumstances, I ask the guy who is holding the gun what he would bid on my hand.

 

It seems the safest approach.

 

Eric

[bearmum]

selective quote

 

Bearmum - Precision with 2/1 actually works very nicely. The problem hands in the 2/1 system 15-18s facing 6-11s, too often you have to risk your part-score to find out if you have the values for game. Limited openers almost eradicate this problem.

 

 

My point was NOT to make 2/1 better (and I guess I'm probably reading your post incorrectly -- if so apologies ;) )

 

RE the 15-18 versus 6-11 hands ------Replying to a Precision 16+ with a positive hand (8+) will NORMALLY allow you to get to game (OCCASIONALLY with two minimum flat hands 3NT not on ) and the collorolly(sp?) is it's relatively easy to stop short of game without those necessary point ranges :unsure:

 

BUT to say I don't think PRECISION needs a 2/1 GF structure -------- I have played it at different times over the last 15+ years (Precision that is) with a forcing NT semi-forcing NT 1NT as 8-11 ALWAYS a change of suit forcing for 1 round , and to be quite honest my "senior" brain is reasonably happy with the way my husband an I play our version of Precision :P

[mikestar]

I think that responding without game interest is usually losing strategy playing Precision. You will play an occasional 5-1, but a fair proportion of the time passing will be best (usually playing a 6-1 at the 2 level instead of the 1 level). In return, these passes make later auctions easier, and allow opener to make penalty doubles.

I agree. On non-fit hands up to about 7 points, pass does OK--loses a bit in the part score battle, but we do much better in the partscore battle when responder does make a constructive resonse. Knowing he has 8+ makes it much easier and safer for opener to compete, vs. 2/1 where he's looking at 6 opposite and might well only find 3 or 4.

 

Missing game won't happen much--I've played Precison with a 16 point upper limit for years, and I can count the number of games I've missed opposite non-fit 6-7's on one hand. Basically, it requires opnener to have max values and good shape (but not good enough to upgrade and open 1C) and for neihter opponent to have a bid.

 

It can happen, but not often.

[han]

Given the system I would pass 1S. Perhaps this is an indication that this system doesn't work very well, especially at matchpoints

[jtfanclub]

I see double on the K and bid 1NT. If partner responds 3H I pass. If he bids 2H, I bid 3D. I have a 6 card suit, so it's theoretically possible that we'll actually make it when he bids 3NT...although I kinda doubt it. If he bids 2C, 2D, 2S, 2NT, 3C, or 3D, at least we've gotten back to par.

 

So let's see...with support for your partner's suit and less than GF values, you can respond:

1NT

2S

2NT

3C

3D

3S

 

And without support for your partner's suit and less than GF values, you can respond:

1NT

 

Do I have that right?

 

This is a personality question, not a hand evaluation question. The system is a grenade. Your partner just pulled the pin. Would you rather throw yourself on the grenade and take a 20% by passing, or try to throw the grenade out the window, which may get you a zero but at least has a hope of getting you all the way up to average? Neither answer is going to give you a good result...the best you can hope for is the least bad one.