Precision 1D/2C variant questions

[whereagles]

Hi all.

 

I'm thinking of playing a variant of the precision including openings of 1♦ and 2♣ Rigal-inspired style. It goes like this:

 

1♦ = 9-14. Balanced 9-11 or unbalanced (with 3+ diams).

2♣ = 9-14. If 5 clubs only, then a 4-card major is guaranteed.

 

So 1♦ includes some offshape stuff like (41)35, 4441s, 45 minors, etc. The rebid

 

1♦ 1x

2♣

 

would show 5 clubs. 4441s are defined as balanced hands and bid accordingly. Inverted raises are also to be played (1♦-2♦ invite+, 3+ cards, no 4-card major).

 

So, questions:

(1) Anyone tried this style, which dumps as many club-based hands as possible into the 1♦ opener?

(2) Does the 9-14 range strike you as too wide?

[Kungsgeten]

I have thought about playing in a style like this but then 1D would promise 3+ diamonds and always unbalanced, and 2C would promise 6+ clubs. It might be managable to have a 9--11 balanced hand there as well, though I am not sure about the gain. I think the 9--14 range is playable, but will take some practice (and also you will probably miss some games which most will play, with something like 14 vs 11). I guess your 1NT opening is 12--14? Personally I would switch it so 1D includes 12--14 bal and 1NT is 9--11 (non-vul), but whatever :)

 

The structure I had in mind was:

 

1C = 15+

1D = Unbalanced with 3+ diamonds, if 3 diamonds then 5 clubs. If 4 diamonds then 5 clubs or 4441. So usually 5+ diamonds.

1M = 5+ suit

1NT = (11)12--14 bal or 5422 with 5 clubs and a 4 card major

2C = 6+ suit

2D = "Precision", so one of 4-4-1-4, 4-4-0-5, 4-3-1-5, 3-4-1-5

 

However I have not tried playing this style.

[whereagles]

I want to keep 2♦ as natural, weak, for non-systemic reasons. Hence

 

• 4414 is balanced, as mentioned.
  
• 4405, (43)15 opens 2♣.
  
• 1NT is indeed 9-11 NV, 12-14 V.
  

and yes, I'm willing to miss some games :)

[straube]

(2) Does the 9-14 range strike you as too wide?

 

Here's an excerpt from Bridgematters

 

Eric Rodwell: They thought they should really be doing some light stuff, so they had a system they called Attack, where, not vulnerable, they were playing that opening one bids were 8 to 14 and the strong club started at 15. One of my students was playing with one of them, so he played this. I found that partner opening 1S with 5-3-3-2 distribution and an 8 count just really made for a lot of problems for us, more than for the opponents. I find it is better to either pass or, if your spades are good enough, to open some sort of weak two bid, rather than open a super-light one bid. The range I prefer is starting at 11, with hand evaluation always being relevant. Plenty of 10 counts, some 9 counts and maybe even some 8 counts . . . would qualify if they have enough playing potential. I don’t think opening a hand like Jx Axxxx Kxxx Qx with 1H is winning bridge...The hand still has to have something that you think is worth 11 points to open. I don’t want to go lighter than that.

[whereagles]

Thx straube.

 

Well, 8-14 is like 9-15. My idea is more like 10-15 (in the guise of 9-14). So I guess I'm half-way from unplayable :)

 

I could fix this, but at the expense of other things. Not sure I'm willing to do it. Anyway, thx.

[rbforster]

A 6 point range (10-15, 9-14, etc) seems pretty common for modern precision systems. It fits well with having two 3 point balanced ranges, one in 1♦ and the other opening 1NT. Some extra tweaks can help with range issues by trying to offer a lighter and a heavier invite.

 

As for styles of 1♦, 2♣, and 2♦, I've seem 3 that seem reasonable:

 

1. 1♦ = bal or natural 4+ (3+?), with 2♣ as 5/4M or 6+ and either 2♦ or 2♥ as 3 suited short diamonds (4414/4405/(43)15)

2. 1♦ = bal or 0+ unbalanced with 4M, 2m is 6+ or 5/4+ minors

3. 1♦ = bal or natural (but not both minors), 2♣ is 6+ or 5/4M, and 2♦ is both minors 5/4+

 

There are probably a few other variations.

[straube]

If your club is 15+ (including a balanced 15) and your 1D response is negative, seems like it will be 0-9. That's a wide range to sort out. I think that's the reason why so many are promising 16 if unbalanced and 17 if balanced.

[whereagles]

@rbforster: indeed, the idea is to have two 3 hcp ranges. In fact, the full system revolves around that idea:

 

0-2, 3-5, 6-8: pass

9-11, 12-14: open 1x/2♣

15+: open 1♣

[Note: 6-8, 9-11 and 1-suiter opens a weak 2. Also, 18-20 bal opens 2NT.]

 

My idea goes in line with style 1.

 

 

@straube: the reason 1♣ is 16+ unbal or 17+ bal is not because of the wide range of the would-be 1♦ negative, I believe. Rather, it's meant to optimize the NT structure so as not to play 3NT with 16 opposite 8 and no long suits. Under 16+ and positive response of 8+ you have

 

If 1♣ opener balanced: 17+ and 8+. That's 25+ regardless.

If 1♣ opener unbalanced: 16+ and 8+. So 24 HCP are possible but there are long suits to compensate.