BBO Discussion Forums: Precision style Two Clubs at matchpoints - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Precision style Two Clubs at matchpoints

#1 User is offline   brianshark 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 895
  • Joined: 2006-May-13
  • Location:Dublin
  • Interests:Artificial Intelligence, Computer Games, Satire, Football, Rugby... and Bridge I suppose.

Posted 2008-April-22, 07:07

75% of the time I open 2, I seem to find myself losing matchpoints. I usually end up playing a low scoring club contract when 1NT is almost as much tricks and occasionally miss a 4-4 or 5-3 major fit when partner is too weak to say anything in response.

Does anyone else experience this? Am I opening 2 on too many hands?

Example: AT72 KQ JT KT763 I opened this hand 2 recently and lost imps when he rest of the room were in 1NT making. I acknowledge that the club suit probably isn't good enough and I should have treated this as a weak NT (in my case open a polish 1 which includes 11-14 balanced). Indeed the advice I was given by a very experienced player who I just gifted a top to was that all 54M22 hands should be treated as balanced in matchpoints.

But what if the hand was
AT72 K6 JT KQT73
or
AQ72 J6 JT KQT73
or
AK72 86 54 KQJ73

Should I open all these hands as 1 (or nebulous 1 or weak NT or whatever you do to show balanced 13 counts)?

What if I had:
AT72 K QJ6 KT873
or
AJ72 8 KQ6 KT873
or
AJ72 KQ6 8 KT873

Treating them as balanced becomes even more of a distortion. But opening them 2 becomes even more of a risk.

I'm told that the precision 2 is meant to be on of the strongest aspects of a strong system. They say even though it costs the odd time at matchpoints, it's benefits outweigh the costs.

I definitely like it at IMPs. I rarely lose much and frequently gain imps any time I open it but it's record at matchpoints is atrocious. What am I doing wrong?
The difference between theory and practice is that in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice, there is.
0

#2 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,372
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2008-April-22, 07:39

brianshark, on Apr 22 2008, 04:07 PM, said:

I'm told that the precision 2 is meant to be on of the strongest aspects of a strong system. They say even though it costs the odd time at matchpoints, it's benefits outweigh the costs.

I'd be interested to know who says this and what they base the assertion on...

Here's my own take on things:

1. Light / limited opening bids are one of the real strengths of a strong club system

2. The traditional Precision 2 opening isn't a particularly good bid, however, its an obvious way to plug a system hole

3. A 2 opening that promises 6+ Clubs is probably preferable if you're playing in a serious partnership and willing to spend a lot of time working on competitive auctions following a 1 opening

4. Life in much easier if you're willing to play strong club and majors first 4CM opening style
Alderaan delenda est
0

#3 User is offline   helene_t 

  • The Abbess
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,068
  • Joined: 2004-April-22
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UK

Posted 2008-April-22, 07:54

Maybe those who say the 2 opening is one of the system's strongest points play it as showing 6+ clubs. This is what most Precision players do.

In WJ, 2 shows 5c4M or 6+ clubs. Maybe it would be an idea to change that. With 11-14 points and a singleton diamonds or (42)25 you could bid as if it was a 12-14 balanced hand. With (41)35, it's probably better to open 1.

Just a random thought from someone with limited experience with WJ. Maybe the above is unplayable for some reason.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
0

#4 User is offline   whereagles 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 14,900
  • Joined: 2004-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal
  • Interests:Everything!

Posted 2008-April-22, 07:58

The precision 2 opener indeed sucks, especially at matchpoints.

At MPs you have to use the 2 relay practically anytime you have a side major, even if this means ending up in a hopeless 2NT/3 contract if you can't find a fit. The point is, if you pass 2 you'll score near zero anyway, so you might as well try and smash your way out of it, even if it means hitting the wall at 100 mph. Same attitude is necessary when you have a side 5 card major: either bid 2 or 2M and hope for the best. Obviously, you need some experience to know whether it's necessary to take this sort of attitude. And tweaking the response scheme to 2 is also necessary. Something like 2M = 4 cards, 2NT = clubs max, 3 = clubs min is preferrable to other stuff that goes all the way to 3NT.

There are other solutions, like those Richard suggested, but if you want to keep it simple, an aggressive attitude and good judgement are the most you can do.
0

#5 User is offline   brianshark 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 895
  • Joined: 2006-May-13
  • Location:Dublin
  • Interests:Artificial Intelligence, Computer Games, Satire, Football, Rugby... and Bridge I suppose.

Posted 2008-April-22, 08:16

Friends of mine who play a precision-based system but tinker with the system a lot have changed to 2 promising 6+. My parter and I, just after the aforementioned tournament, are considering specifically including most 5422s in the polish 1 opening (we already include 4=4=1=4) and generally being more strict about opening 2 only with an excellent 5 card suit or a decent 6 card suit.

We already play the responses to the 2 relay as 2M = 4 card M and 2NT / 3 = 6+clubs and NT oriented or not.

Incidentally, we don't actually use 2N / 3 as min or max. It's not part of WJ05 if I recall. Should it be?
The difference between theory and practice is that in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice, there is.
0

#6 User is offline   helene_t 

  • The Abbess
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,068
  • Joined: 2004-April-22
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UK

Posted 2008-April-22, 08:27

I think you exaggerate, Whereagles. Lots of the time declarer has a 6-card clubs and we play a comfortable 2 while the field has opened 1 and allowed opps to find their major suit fit. I would just play normal bridge, even at matchpoints.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
0

#7 User is offline   Apollo81 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,162
  • Joined: 2006-July-10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland

Posted 2008-April-22, 08:47

Quote

But what if the hand was
♠AT72 ♥K6 ♦JT ♣KQT73
or
♠AQ72 ♥J6 ♦JT ♣KQT73
or
♠AK72 ♥86 ♦54 ♣KQJ73


I would want to open 1 and rebid 1 on all of these hands. I'm not used to playing a Precision style where this shows diamonds also. If this sequence does show diamonds then I would treat the first two of these as weak notrumps and open 2 with the last one.

Quote

What if I had:
♠AT72 ♥K ♦QJ6 ♣KT873
or
♠AJ72 ♥8 ♦KQ6 ♣KT873
or
♠AJ72 ♥KQ6 ♦8 ♣KT873


Again on the first two I would want to open 1 and rebid 1. My second choice would be opening 1 and rebidding 1NT. The third one looks like a normal Precision 2 opener.
0

#8 User is offline   whereagles 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 14,900
  • Joined: 2004-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal
  • Interests:Everything!

Posted 2008-April-22, 08:52

brianshark, on Apr 22 2008, 02:16 PM, said:

1. Friends of mine who play a precision-based system but tinker with the system a lot have changed to 2 promising 6+.

2. We already play the responses to the 2 relay as 2M = 4 card M and 2NT / 3 = 6+clubs and NT oriented or not. Incidentally, we don't actually use 2N / 3 as min or max. It's not part of WJ05 if I recall. Should it be?

1. Berkowitz's precision also recommends to always have a 6 card suit when opening 2. Of course, any 5 clubs hand has to go into the 1 opener, which turns into a 0+ diamonds opener in the case of 4-4-0-5 shape. This is actually GOOD because then you finds the major fit. Trouble is, you need to tweak the responses to 1 a bit and that can get you into pretty muddy waters. I speak from experience!

2. I mentioned min/max as opposed to NT/suit oriented simply as a possibility. You can play it anyway you want.
0

#9 User is offline   whereagles 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 14,900
  • Joined: 2004-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal
  • Interests:Everything!

Posted 2008-April-22, 08:56

helene_t, on Apr 22 2008, 02:27 PM, said:

I think you exaggerate, Whereagles. Lots of the time declarer has a 6-card clubs and we play a comfortable 2 while the field has opened 1 and allowed opps to find their major suit fit. I would just play normal bridge, even at matchpoints.

I'm only telling my experience. I found the 2 opener is very prone to yield MP zeroes by loss of major suit and NT contracts. If you have a better experience, well, good for you. But based on what I know, I would advise against playing normal bridge after 2. A swingy approach will rescue from some fatalities and, in my opinion, works better at MPs.

At imps, you can more or less get away with letting pard play 2, of course.
0

#10 User is offline   brianshark 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 895
  • Joined: 2006-May-13
  • Location:Dublin
  • Interests:Artificial Intelligence, Computer Games, Satire, Football, Rugby... and Bridge I suppose.

Posted 2008-April-22, 08:57

In polish (wj05 anyway), 1 would be 4+ so I assume you'd open them 1 and then 1NT which is fairly equivalent and shows the same balanced minimum. In some styles of precision, won't opening 1 and rebidding s show some length in s anyway? I don't play much precision so I wouldn't know.

The 6th hand there is one that precision has a specific bid for but not polish. It's either a weak NT or a 2 opening and it's an ugly choice to make. The 4th and 5th can be catered for if you relax the length requirement of the 1 to 3, but that's not something I'd like to do either.
The difference between theory and practice is that in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice, there is.
0

#11 User is offline   whereagles 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 14,900
  • Joined: 2004-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal
  • Interests:Everything!

Posted 2008-April-22, 08:59

brianshark, on Apr 22 2008, 02:57 PM, said:

In some styles of precision, won't opening 1 and rebidding s show some length in s anyway? I don't play much precision so I wouldn't know.

In most variants, it just shows 4 spades. It doesn't yet say much about shape.
0

#12 User is offline   kenrexford 

  • Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,586
  • Joined: 2005-September-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
  • Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor

Posted 2008-April-22, 09:17

When I played Precision, I hated two openings. 2 and 2. So, In tinkered with a few alternative structures. What I ended up adopting I liked a lot, so I'll share.

First, I moved the 4441 hands down one and opened them 2. This allowed me an effective tool to open all 4441 hands through this bid, cleaning up 1 openings as never 4441. No anchor suit was required. The response structure included 2NT as either of two options -- natural, or both minors. A 2 response to a 2 opening asked for shape and strength. With a minimum, Opener rebid 2 if he had four hearts (pass or correct kicks in, or 3 artificial asked for the stiff in steps), or 2 with 4144/4054/4045. With a maximum, Opener bid one below the stiff (2NT stiff club, on up to 3 for stiff spade). There are other sexy tools available, of course.

Second, I made a 2 opening show both minors. This also cleared up a 1 opening. A bonus is that minor two-suiters rarely have a four-card major, meaning that you opened 2 or 1 whenever you had one or both four-card majors. The response structure to 2 included a 2 asking bid. With a minimum, Opener showed a major fragment if he had one (2 for spades, 3 for hearts) or bid 2NT with no major fragment. With a maximum, Opener showed the major naturally at the three-level, or bid 3/3NT (distinguish these two as desired -- many different approaches had different results). A nice feature was in slam auctions, where 2...4minor was GF and asked Opener to use RKCB; the first step (4-P-4) was RKCB, and the second step was Exclusion RKCB for the obvious short suit (or steps hearts/spades if not obvious).

These two calls rarely caused problems but frequently scored well at MP or at IMP scoring. Penalty doubles were lucrative. Use some discretion, though, whenh deciding on 2245/2254 if treatment as balanced seems better, and also be careful to decide if treatment as a one-suited minor will work better.

These two changes obviously also affected the 1 opening. This opening then showed one or the other minor (could have a void in diamonds if long clubs), but never both (unless treated as a one-suiter). Either "one-suited minor" opening could have a four-card major holding. Knowing this leads to other treatments that you can work out (e.g., 1-P-1-P-2-P-2NT usually asks for the minor in some fashion, etc.). This works wonders, as well. There are some strange agreements to work out. For instance, you might have some auctions where Responder makes a cheap NT call asking Opener to bid his minor, whatever it is, at the three-level (1-1-P-2-P-P-2NT with 3-3 or better in minors, for example).

I tried permutations, such as a 2 opening possibly having a four-card major (4054, for example), but this got unwieldy and seemed unwise. If that pattern, either treat as a 4441 or as a minor-major canape (open 1).
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."

-P.J. Painter.
0

#13 User is offline   jdonn 

  • - - T98765432 AQT8
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,085
  • Joined: 2005-June-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV

Posted 2008-April-22, 09:45

It's just necessary for 2 to show 6+ clubs, it works terribly when it shows 5+ clubs. There isn't much else to it.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
0

#14 User is offline   han 

  • Under bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,797
  • Joined: 2004-July-25
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Posted 2008-April-22, 10:00

Agree with Josh, old news.
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.

- hrothgar
0

#15 User is offline   keylime 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: FD TEAM
  • Posts: 2,735
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nashville, TN
  • Interests:Motorsports, cricket, disc golf, and of course - bridge. :-)

Posted 2008-April-22, 10:24

I agree with the panel - for me, 2 is 6+ clubs, and I rather open 1D, even on a stiff if I didn't have the Precision 2 call, to locate my majors.

A simple module I think is 2 is 6+ clubs, 2 be the three suiter short in diamonds. That way you unload some of the 4315's and not end up in 2 on a 1-2/1-3 fit! :P
"Champions aren't made in gyms, champions are made from something they have deep inside them - a desire, a dream, a vision. They have to have last-minute stamina, they have to be a little faster, they have to have the skill and the will. But the will must be stronger than the skill. " - M. Ali
0

#16 User is offline   david_c 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,178
  • Joined: 2004-November-14
  • Location:England
  • Interests:Mathematics;<br>20th century classical music;<br>Composing.

Posted 2008-April-22, 12:40

It does depend what system you're playing, I think. Most of the top Precision players seem to be playing 2 as promising six cards, but the Swedish Club or Polish Club players are playing it as 5+.

There's a long, rambling section on this in my Polish Club notes (pages 6-7). I would open 1 on all Brian's examples except for

AK72 86 54 KQJ73 - extreme concentration of values in the two suits;

and

AJ72 8 KQ6 KT873 - small singleton in a major is not good for 1.

Whereas I think it is a clear mistake to open 2 on

AT72 KQ JT KT763 - routine weak NT;

and

AJ72 KQ6 8 KT873 - a singleton diamond is no problem for opening 1.
0

#17 User is offline   rbforster 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,611
  • Joined: 2006-March-18

Posted 2008-April-22, 12:45

If you're willing to open light in 3rd seat (or already do), you can probably get away with passing some of the awkward club hand shapes in first seat. Whether you want to pass just the (43)15 shapes making 2 6+, or passing all of the precision 2/2 shapes and using 2/2 as weak bids, there are lots of options along these lines.

The basic version of my "Silent Club" (a strong club system) uses this approach of passing initially with precision 2 (and 2) hand shapes.

1st/2nd:
P - might be 10-15 with precision 2/2 shape
1 - 2+ 10-15
1M - 5+ 10-15
2X - weak

3rd/4th:
P - 0-9 or no weak 2 bid
1 - 2+ 10-15
1 - usually 5+ 10-15 (but might be only 4 hearts with 4414, 4405 shape)
1 - usually 5+ 10-15
2 - 10-15 5+ clubs, precision style (43)15 or 6+ clubs
2/2M - weak

Opening light in 3rd is pretty common anyway, as are the occassional 4 card majors (even when playing a 5cM system) so this isn't a huge departure from the normal 3rd seat openings. I take this one step farther and open light in 4th seat too, which allows me to use the same treatment of passing these awkward club hands in 2nd seat as well.

Once you get to 3rd or 4th seat, the precision 2 opening is no longer as troublesome. If partner has a good hand, it must have clubs so we have a big fit anyway and can afford to explore for our potential major fit using normal methods. By opening the 4414 and 4405 hands 1, this guarantees there is only one major to focus on in a 3rd or 4th seat 2 opener's hand.
0

#18 User is offline   Mbodell 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,871
  • Joined: 2007-April-22
  • Location:Santa Clara, CA

Posted 2008-April-22, 14:36

I agree that opening a 6+ precision 2 is a great bid that leads to great results. Putting the (34)15 and 4405 and 4414 hands in 2 works very well (although comes up very rarely if your 2 is just 0-1 diamond 3 suiters) as does putting them in 1 (although you may need better methods).
0

#19 User is offline   awm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,306
  • Joined: 2005-February-09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Zurich, Switzerland

Posted 2008-April-22, 15:29

In a Polish Club style system it seems reasonable to put the hands with 5 into the 1 opening. These hands are roughly equivalent in value to weak notrumps anyway (at least when no major suit fit materializes). If the auction goes 1-1M, you can raise with a fit (even with three cards and a side singleton) and rebid 1NT if partner bid your singleton major. Over 1-1 you bid your four card major. This seems unlikely to lead to real problems, and preserves the structure of 1 being 4+. In fact this is probably an easier fix than in a precision-style system where you would need to either have 1 promising one diamond only or open 2 with (43)15 patterns.
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
0

#20 User is offline   brianshark 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 895
  • Joined: 2006-May-13
  • Location:Dublin
  • Interests:Artificial Intelligence, Computer Games, Satire, Football, Rugby... and Bridge I suppose.

Posted 2008-April-23, 02:13

Great, thanks guys. Lots of helpful input.

I thought that precision and polish would be fairly similar in terms of the retrictions on opening 2, but not quite. In precision, it seems people just throw all the undesirable 5club-4major and 4441 hands into the ever-more-nebulous 1 and 2 openings.

But in polish we like our 1 as 4+ and 2 as weak multi (or wilkosz if you can get away with it). That means there is a certain amount of hands that have to fit into either 1 or 2 and can't go anywhere else.

So it seems that preserving the quality of the 2 opening and making the 1 include more shapes is the way to go. But how far to go is the question?

I could go with David (and a few others') suggestion to open 1 with 11-14 balanced, or semi-balanced such as 4414, most (42)25, and unbalanced such as (43)15 or (322)6 or 3316 with a weak suit, and still open 2 with some 54 hands if the strength is in the right place or the singleton is in the wrong place.

Or I could by rule include all 54M hands and 2 becomes 6+. But what to do with 4405. Am I to open this 1 as well?
The difference between theory and practice is that in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice, there is.
0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users