[Lord Molyb]

---

N/S were playing precision, so south had an obvious 1♣ opener. After 1♦ (negative), south had two options: 1♠ (natural, NF), or 2♠ (game forcing, similar to 2♣-2♦-2♠ in standard), and chose 1♠. North decided to pass instead of raising.

After south managed 13 tricks, who should get the blame for missing game or slam?

[helene_t]

North must raise

[whereagles]

Indeed, although methods also come to mind...

[MrAce]

Lord Molyb, on 2014-April-05, 15:42, said:

.

After south managed 13 tricks, who should get the blame for missing game or slam?

Whoever thought that 1♠ is the safest place to play when holding 4 card support and max of a negative response, gets the blame and an immediate ticket to closest pdship desk !

[neilkaz]

I blame south 100% for agreeing to play with this north! North's failure to raise to 2♠ maybe the most egregious display of lack of concept that I've seen on the forum this year.

[neilkaz]

whereagles, on 2014-April-05, 16:50, said:

Indeed, although methods also come to mind...

You mean methods for south to slowly torture north to death?

[aguahombre]

The other answer to the OP ---no, South should not treat the hand the same as a 2C opener followed by a 2S rebid.

Playing plain old standard table-top Bridge with 5cM, South would/should still open 1S and North should raise....if only to prevent a cheap balancing action by the opps.

[MrAce]

aguahombre, on 2014-April-05, 18:18, said:

The other answer to the OP ---no, South should not treat the hand the same as a 2C opener followed by a 2S rebid.

Playing plain old standard table-top Bridge with 5cM, South would/should still open 1S and North should raise....if only to prevent a cheap balancing action by the opps.

Also in Precision a simple suit rebid after a negative 1♦ response shows 16-21. When you hold a 3 suiter hand, it is only common sense to keep the auction low as much as possible. This is one of the reasons Precision was created at the first place anyway. To avoid unnecessary jumping bids when one holds a strong hand and to keep the auction at low levels.

[the hog]

North's failure to raise is incredible and shows a total lack of understanding of the system and of hand evaluation.
Though I will also say that I do not like a system where a hand as strong as the Sth hand has to rebid 1S. That is another story however.

[aguahombre]

the hog, on 2014-April-05, 19:11, said:

Though I will also say that I do not like a system where a hand as strong as the Sth hand has to rebid 1S. That is another story however.

I don't see a drawback to a system where 1S as a rebid shows 16-21 compared against our methods where a 1S opener shows 10-21. Opener's hand only goes up in value if there is a fit, and so does alleged responder's hand.

In this instance, Opener has survived the big drawback of the system. He got to bid 1S instead of being preempted out of his sox in hearts.

[ggwhiz]

North should have had the stroke before passing 1♠. At least the caddy substituting would have found a raise.

[the hog]

aguahombre, on 2014-April-05, 19:39, said:

I don't see a drawback to a system where 1S as a rebid shows 16-21 compared against our methods where a 1S opener shows 10-21. Opener's hand only goes up in value if there is a fit, and so does alleged responder's hand.

In this instance, Opener has survived the big drawback of the system. He got to bid 1S instead of being preempted out of his sox in hearts.

This hand counts to 20HCP. If a fit is discovered, the hand is huge. I much prefer a 1H second strength showing bid here unrelated to Hearts. Look at Power Precision for a very old fashioned version of this style.

[aguahombre]

the hog, on 2014-April-05, 22:53, said:

This hand counts to 20HCP. If a fit is discovered, the hand is huge. I much prefer a 1H second strength showing bid here unrelated to Hearts. Look at Power Precision for a very old fashioned version of this style.

I can see how that approach would protect us on this hand against responder's silly pass. Sort of like a mini-Kokish.

[PhilG007]

Lord Molyb, on 2014-April-05, 15:42, said:

---

N/S were playing precision, so south had an obvious 1♣ opener. After 1♦ (negative), south had two options: 1♠ (natural, NF), or 2♠ (game forcing, similar to 2♣-2♦-2♠ in standard), and chose 1♠. North decided to pass instead of raising.

After south managed 13 tricks, who should get the blame for missing game or slam?

South is 100% to blame. The ♠ suit is far too good for a simple response of 1 As 2♠
would be game forcing in the system,that must be the bid.4♠ is the par contract. How one reaches a slam is in the
lap of the gods(!).

[Fluffy]

Inb my system 1♠ is 16-19 (1♥ showing 20+), and I think over that I would not raise with north's quaks, but it is close. When the range is 16-22 raising is obvious.

[MrAce]

Fluffy, on 2014-April-06, 02:41, said:

Inb my system 1♠ is 16-19 (1♥ showing 20+), and I think over that I would not raise with north's quaks, but it is close. When the range is 16-22 raising is obvious.

IMO you should rethink about raising vs 16-19, and i believe it is a HUGE mistake not to.

I would raise with N hand even if 1♠ was limited to 11-14. (Basically i would raise even if S forgot to open 1♣ and opened 1♠)

I think people are extremely underestimating how much a FIT, especially 4 card fit, can improve the other hand.

Axxxxx
x
AKxx
xx

Give me 4 card support and i wanna be in 4♠. Even if you give me KQJx ♠ and more than doubleton diamonds, i still wanna be in 4♠ since then they are almost guaranteed to make 4♥

The term "support with support" very rarely disappointed me, if any.

It is not only about finding games or slams. You can benefit from it in different ways, especially when your side has a fit in boss suit.

[gszes]

100% to north for failing to raise 1s to 2s. This is simple bridge
logic no matter the system but passing 1s while playing precision
is just plain not thinking for a second before putting that pass
card on the table.

The 1c opener has shown 16+ and 5 plus spades. That means your
partnership has a minimum of 21 hcp and a nine card trump fit.
How can it not be reasonable to raise that 1s to 2s under those
conditions? Getting caught up in HCP and downgrading quacks has
a tendency to make players forget what the bidding is trying to
accomplish. Think before you pass that's why we play this game:)

[dboxley]

99% North, an automatic 2S bid

[Lord Molyb]

This was a sanity check, I was south. Funny story, the opening lead was made and partner places his 5432 of trumps down, and I exclaim, "You had all that and didn't raise?"

[the hog]

MrAce, on 2014-April-06, 04:55, said:

IMO you should rethink about raising vs 16-19, and i believe it is a HUGE mistake not to.

I would raise with N hand even if 1♠ was limited to 11-14. (Basically i would raise even if S forgot to open 1♣ and opened 1♠)

I think people are extremely underestimating how much a FIT, especially 4 card fit, can improve the other hand.

Axxxxx
x
AKxx
xx

Give me 4 card support and i wanna be in 4♠. Even if you give me KQJx ♠ and more than doubleton diamonds, i still wanna be in 4♠ since then they are almost guaranteed to make 4♥

The term "support with support" very rarely disappointed me, if any.

It is not only about finding games or slams. You can benefit from it in different ways, especially when your side has a fit in boss suit.

I totally echo Mr Ace's sentiments expressed in this post.
Not raising opposite even an 11-14 opening is a joke.