[TylerE]

Posted for public consumption....will get more complete as time goes by:

100k PDF

[whereagles]

ah, cool. maybe I translate my strong diamond notes and post them here

[TylerE]

It's a good process to go through. While we currently have a set of notes, it was just a few pages I'd thrown together in a word processor. Many auctions were basically just assumed. Partner and I are on the same page (usually) on these undiscussed auctions, but I plan on codifying all of them. I'm also making a few changes to the system to improve it. For instance, we're currently playing a 5+ 2♣ opening, in the new system I've gone to the more modern 6+ 2♣, with the (43)15 hands going into the 2♦ opening.

The version I posted is the 'book' version, setup for printing in the 6x9 'trade paperback' format. Once I finish the notes, I'm going to go through one of the online print-on-demand sites and have a few copies printed up to have around. This is surprisingly affordable, on the order of $7 per book + shipping.

[helene_t]

This looks really good.

One thing I am curious about: the forcing 1M rebids after 1♣-1♦. Is this a common treatment among players of modern precision? I thought Kokish was the common treatment.

Maybe I could modify my Precision FD file to cover the basics of it. Not promising anything at this stage but it looks as if many things are the same.

[TylerE]

I've seen it in other systems before. Probably not standard. Making the bids forcing makes it easier to handle some hands, mainly big two suiters, since you're going to get a rebid. Kokish can work with this system, certainly, but in the base system I've tried to avoid artificiality like that unless I see a real systemic need. In the regular partnership I play this system with twice a week, we don't play kokish, and I rarely miss it.

[Vilgan]

I am a huge fan of kokish, but can play without it if need be. It doesn't matter often, but every once in a while it can be huge (partner played 1 NT with 21 hcp making 1, for a very good board this past weekend).

The 2 things that really jumped out at me were NT ranges and TAB on suit acceptance. I think the precision today book suggests an initial CAB on suit acceptance, and that seems a lot better. You instantly get a feel for whether slam is worth exploring or if game is the max. Also, the 13-15 NT range (that it sounds like you are playing) seems a bit old fashioned. Its low enough most people have a penalty X available, strong enough that the preemptive value isn't as huge as a 10-13, but you still give up finding the 4-4 major fits on a lot more hands.

Your system notes (so far anyways) are way easier to read than mine. Good luck on finishing them up

Eric

[TylerE]

Vilgan, on May 27 2008, 08:52 AM, said:

The 2 things that really jumped out at me were NT ranges and TAB on suit acceptance. I think the precision today book suggests an initial CAB on suit acceptance, and that seems a lot better.


. Also, the 13-15 NT range (that it sounds like you are playing) seems a bit old fashioned.

No, Precision Today recommends tab first. While the main section will use standard TAB/CAB, I have an alternate relay version of CAB I am going to include compresses the responses considerably, often allowing asks in all 3 suits BELOW 4NT, especially when responder's suit is spades.

The system uses a 10-12NT when NV in 1st-3rd. I intend to include a full writeup of our penalty runouts.

[Vilgan]

More to confirm that I'm not crazy than to argue good/bad:

Page 174 of precision today (section on transfer responses):

"When you have a fit for partner's long suit, we recommend that your transfer acceptance bids carry the message that you have a fit - AND you want to know about the aces and kings in his hand. (Beta)"

So I guess its actually called Beta rather than TAB or CAB. They recommend 0-2 in the first step which I hate though, as there are some hands where 2 makes slam worth exploring and 0 makes the 5 level dangerous.

[rbforster]

Perhaps I missed it, but do you include 5332 as a balanced shape? I know I like to include this in the 1♣-1♠-1NT relays and there's plenty of space to do so if you play around with the relays. (example here - see the bottom of the page for the balanced relays). Certainly I like treating 5m332 as balanced; for 5M332 I could go either way.

When I played a similar system to your, we used accepting a suit transfer as a CAB with the first step being 0-1 controls (A,K=2,1).

[TylerE]

Vilgan, on May 27 2008, 09:07 AM, said:

More to confirm that I'm not crazy than to argue good/bad:

Page 174 of precision today (section on transfer responses):

"When you have a fit for partner's long suit, we recommend that your transfer acceptance bids carry the message that you have a fit - AND you want to know about the aces and kings in his hand. (Beta)"

So I guess its actually called Beta rather than TAB or CAB. They recommend 0-2 in the first step which I hate though, as there are some hands where 2 makes slam worth exploring and 0 makes the 5 level dangerous.

Ahh, ok, I'll admit it's been a while since I really dug in PT. It's the book I learned from, but I've since moved on, ya know?

[TylerE]

Rob F, on May 27 2008, 09:10 AM, said:

Perhaps I missed it, but do you include 5332 as a balanced shape?  I know I like to include this in the 1♣-1♠-1NT relays and there's plenty of space to do so if you play around with the relays.  (example here - see the bottom of the page for the balanced relays).  Certainly I like treating 5m332 as balanced; for 5M332 I could go either way.

When I played a similar system to your, we used accepting a suit transfer as a CAB with the first step being 0-1 controls (A,K=2,1).

No, I'm not putting 5332 hands into the relay, for now. I'll admit it's not the most efficient scheme, but it works well, for one responder will rarely bid a suit he actually has, so wrong siding is minimized. This does mean the NT is occasionally 'wrongsided' when responder has 5 clubs, but at the same time it's often right for the weaker hand to have the lead come up, so I don't lose much sleep over it.

I looked at the relay you linked to. While it certainly appears playable, it's a bit more complex that I want for this system. I want the basic system to be something that an intermediate player can sit down and play comfortably. Also, as a guiding systemic principle, I try to limit the hands as much as possible as quickly as possible, tends to work better in competition.

[PrecisionL]

helene_t, on May 27 2008, 08:29 AM, said:

This looks really good.

One thing I am curious about: the forcing 1M rebids after 1♣-1♦. Is this a common treatment among players of modern precision? I thought Kokish was the common treatment.

Maybe I could modify my Precision FD file to cover the basics of it. Not promising anything at this stage but it looks as if many things are the same.

Actually, 1♣ - 1♦ - 1♥/1♠ = 4+ cards and one round force is what Kathie Wei (Sender) and Judi Radin played and published in their book ONE CLUB COMPLETE, 1981 (copies still available from Baron-Barclay).

I have played this approach ever since. I like it better than the Kokish rebid of 1♥ for 19/20+ hcp hands. Also, mini-splinters were detailed in this book.

In our previous system, Transfer Precision Club, acceptance of the transfer is a Beta reply (for As & Ks) to settle the slam question early. First step is 1-2 controls. Now, in ULTRA CLUB, we show distribution with relays before making a Beta ask later in the auction. This works really well.

Larry

[TylerE]

New version uploaded, http://www.tylere.ne...r-precision.pdf

[effervesce]

The new version seems to be right-justified rather than left to me. Anybody else see the same?

[matmat]

you're using a huge-ass font... not that there is anything wrong with that .

which class file are you using?

[blackshoe]

Looks to me like it's justified - by which I mean both margins are smoothed.

[TylerE]

I'm using the memoir class. Font is 12pt. This is the 'book' formatted version, so the pages are 6" x 9", not 8.5" x 11". For best viewing set your PDF reader to "two up continuous", with the first page on the right.

[TylerE]

http://www.tylere.net/tyler-screen.pdf

There's a version that's a bit more optimized for online viewing