Precision with Mini-Roman

[tommylee]

Partner and I play Precision mostly at match points. Partner wishes to substitute Mini-Roman (11-15) 4441 and 4450 (no 5 card majors) with no guarantees as to suits for our standard Precision 2 diamond sequences. Pard cites frequency of occurrence but I am concerned that the structure of mini-roman as suggested introduces more risk and fewer opportunities to stop at a playable level when there is no fit. Is my concern unfounded?

[Siegmund]

I've seen several Precision pairs do it, but usually some restricted kind of Mini-Roman -- most commonly "mini-Roman but we always have spades," and have also seen "either 4-4 or 4-5 in the majors", kind of half-Mini-Roman-half-Flannery.

 

For most systems Mini-Roman is a solution looking for a problem, but stone age Precision had enough of a problem to have a reason for its custom 2D bid that was very under-loaded.

[SteelWheel]

To amplify Siegmund's point: You play a specialized 2♦ call to cover a "hole" in your bidding system; you don't look for reasons to use it as much as possible. You look to restrict its use to cover those small amount of specialized cases where no other opening bid is satisfactory. The original Precision 2♦ opening (intermediate and basically a "takeout double of a 1♦ opening") qualifies as such an opening.

 

Playing 2♦ as mini-Roman is generally a "let's throw this in the Cuisinart and see what comes out" sort of bid. It adds very little, if anything to any bidding system.

 

Having said all that: If you like the idea of a mini-Roman opening, try looking at Ken Rexford's MICS write-up; he suggests using a 2♣ opening bid as a mini-Roman type bid. The one extra step makes a big difference in your ability to bail out on the 2-level when necessary.

[Mbodell]

FWIW the precision 2♦, while rare, isn't horribly uncommon either (and generally good things happen IME when we open it). I think when I simmed it in one of our precision systems it was about 0.75% to 0.8% of hands. Once every 5 sessions or so. That is not super often, but it is only about 1/5 of as often as you are dealt a 15-17 nt hand. It is somewhere between 1/2 and 1/3 as often as a weak two bid in a specific suit.

[Zelandakh]

There are some other knock-on effects that might also be undesirable. It means, for example, that you are back to opening 2♣ with (43)15 shape. That alone is probably more than enough to offset any advantage you get from not opening 1♦ with the extra 3-suited hands. That is in addition to the reduced effectiveness of the 2♦ opening itself. This is not a change I can see any reason to recommend at all!

[jmc]

In a partner's pet precision systems we play 2D as 11-15 any 4441 or 44(50). The frequency does increase and the negative inferences when it doesn't happen can be helpful. That being said I am not a fan.

 

I think having the 2D guarantee D shortness makes it easier to stop low or blast game without leaking much information. Especially white vs. red its easy to have auctions like 2D p 4M where the fourth opponent is frozen out pretty effectively with no good options.

 

I also prefer 2C to show 6+ clubs and that means my 2D is better as (43)15, 4405, or 4414.

[helene_t]

What does your 1♦ opening show?

 

The rationale for mini-roman is that if you play a 12-14 1NT opening and, therefore, a 1nt rebid showing 15-17, some 4441 hands have rebid problems.

 

I would think that this wouldn't be a problem in Precision even if you play an 11-13 1nt or some such. Does your 1♦ opening really gain substantially from not containing the 4441 hands?

 

It seems to me that playing mini-roman creates two quite serious problems:

- you will sometimes be too high, or lack room for game tries, when you open 2♦ instead of 1♦

- as Zel and jmc say, you probably can't put the (43)15 hands in the 2♦ opening at the same time so those will have to open something else. Pass, 1♦, 1NT, 2♣. Pick your poison, all four options are terrible.

 

So to compensate for those disadvantages, the 1♦ opening would have to gain a lot. I doubt that that is the case but of course I don't know how your 1♦ opening works.

[PrecisionL]

I frequently get good MP Pair results when the opponents play Mini-Roman. I usually pass and lead trumps. :<)

 

In a Precision context, the 2♦ opening bid short in ♦ fills a hole in the system. Expand the bid to cover 3=4=1=5 and 4=3=1=5 hands.

 

This solves the 5♣ & 4M hand type which some still open 2♣.

 

Another approach (if you can stand the ambigous 1 Diamond Opening) is to make 2♦ Opening: 6♦ or 5♦ + 4♣. I use this approach in two Precision Style Partnerships with a 1♦ opening bid promising at least one 4-cd major and diamonds may be as short as zero.

[all loomis]

i played a precision variant for a few years, with roman 2c and 2d.

1d was unbal with length in either minor. worked very well, so long as you are willing to play a 12-15 nt.

1c rebids also benefited from extracting strong 3x4 hands.