[helene_t]

We play a very simple Precision system: first-round relays on 1♣, 1NT, 2♣ and 2NT, doubles and cuebids somewhat ill-defined but at least not natural, for the rest everything natural. Last week this sequence came up (matchpoints):

1♣-(1♥)-X-(2♥)
2♠

In classical Precision (Berkowitz/Manley), X means 4-7 points any shape. We define it slightly better by playing semi-positive jumps and trap pass. But still, the suggestion of a 4-card spades isn't really there. In that view, my 2♠ should maybe promise 5, in which case I should double with a four-card spades. Now what to to with both minors - can't afford to pass at matchpoints with less than 3 hearts, but a non-forcing 3♦ with say 3154 is not that great either.

Then I thought that if a freebid of 1NT shows appr. 6-7, the X becomes better defined. One problem with that is that I really hate those doubles that can be either stronger than a freebid (if the natural bid is NT) or weaker (if the natural bid is a suit). Also, a 6-point hand can barely have a double guard and if responder has a single guard, 3NT is often better played by opener.

I wonder if it would be better to play all simple freebids non-forcing (one could make an obvious exception for 1-level freebids in a suit) and then play strong jumps and strong doubles. One problem with that is that we play semi-positive jumps in most other situations.

"Jack" (Dutch computer program) plays an archaic system with 1NT as an omnibus GF. Of course it's silly to limit the double to 8 points but besides that it works surprisingly well.

Any thoughts? Yes, I know that transfer freebids are cool but that's no option for this partnership.

[dake50]

Play 2C over 1H as artificial GF. Frees all others to be distributional middling.

[Adebisi]

Hei! 2S should be 5+ ok, 2NT nat.I play that the 1st dbl showes 6-7 any and pass 0-5 or trap so pass should be forcing(if u have minors or any gameforce hand and dbl = exactly 4s as u mentioned)

[awm]

I like the following relatively simple method:

One level bids are natural and forcing for one round, something like 5+ points.
Two level (non-jump) bids are forcing to game.
Double is takeout and shows 5+ points.
Pass is either weak (0-4) or some hand with length in the opponents' suit.
Cuebid and various jumps are transfers, with a weakish distributional hand.

My general observation is that announcing a game force doesn't necessarily shut the opponents up. Making some call that just says "I have a game force" with nothing specific about the hand is inviting the opponents to bump the auction to a level where you're really in trouble. In some sense the opponents are less likely to compete when your side has the majority of the values but not necessarily game, since this is the time when doubling them for a one or two trick set is most likely to be a big result for your side.

I've also been relatively unimpressed with non-forcing free bids that show "up to just short of GF values" in really any system. The problem is that the range of hands where partner can actually pass is extremely narrow (has to be very minimum, not a total misfit, not a good enough fit to make a light game). It seems better to play free bids as forcing (or as showing well short of game values, but opposite a strong club such hands are pretty infrequent and usually don't want to bid).

In some one-level interference auctions I don't mind playing "systems on" and I do this with some partners.

[helene_t]

I like Adam's method. A few comments:
- As mentioned, I don't want to play transfers but playing the jumps as weak and natural (as we already do) should not be a problem other than sometimes wrong-siding the contract.
- What does a notrump freebid mean in your method? Natural GF?
- Playing freebids in a suit as invite+ has the drawback of introducing some situations the forcing characters of which are not clear.

[lowerline]

An approach I read about in Hughes' book:

1♣ - (1♠) -

pass = 0-4 or trap
dbl = 5+ balanced
1NT = transfer ♣ 5+
2♣ = transfer ♦ 5+
2♦ = transfer ♥ 5+
2♥ = 3-suiter GF
2♠+ = 2-suiters and other specialized bids GF

You should also consider what to do when they use something like Crash or Twerb against you and you don't have a cuebid...

Steven

[helene_t]

lowerline, on May 21 2007, 10:57 AM, said:

You should also consider what to do when they use something like Crash or Twerb against you and you don't have a cuebid...

Ha-ha, we play in a coffeehouse club so nobody have ever heard about those conventions. What does happen frequently, though, is that they bid 2♣ or 3♣, alerted as Ghestem, and you wonder if partner believes that .....