Help
I'm returning to the idea of Precision with 1 NT = 16 - 18 HCPs, no Singleton. 1 ♣ = 16+ with a possible/probable singleton/void.
From a small sample size, it appears to work OK.
In Blocking out the system, I looked at considering A-x as "Just about as good as a Singleton". Opening 1 ♣ or 1 NT would depend on the hand certainly but the actual Bid Probabilities would be 50/50-ish. I then thought about other hand combinations surrounding A-x and considered that perhaps A-x "wasn't just about as good as a Singleton". In other words, most hands with this 1C/Strong NT feature should probably be opened 1 NT, maybe significantly more often.
It's too early for daiquiries so what to do?
THNX,
CW
Page 1 of 1
Precision 1C paired with Strong NT, 1st Harmonic Does A-x most often require a 1 NT Bid?
#2
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 342
- Joined: 2009-March-21
Posted 2018-January-15, 14:17
1Wishbone1, on 2018-January-15, 13:34, said:
I'm returning to the idea of Precision with 1 NT = 16 - 18 HCPs, no Singleton. 1 ♣ = 16+ with a possible/probable singleton/void.
From a small sample size, it appears to work OK.
In Blocking out the system, I looked at considering A-x as "Just about as good as a Singleton". Opening 1 ♣ or 1 NT would depend on the hand certainly but the actual Bid Probabilities would be 50/50-ish. I then thought about other hand combinations surrounding A-x and considered that perhaps A-x "wasn't just about as good as a Singleton". In other words, most hands with this 1C/Strong NT feature should probably be opened 1 NT, maybe significantly more often.
It's too early for daiquiries so what to do?
THNX,
CW
From a small sample size, it appears to work OK.
In Blocking out the system, I looked at considering A-x as "Just about as good as a Singleton". Opening 1 ♣ or 1 NT would depend on the hand certainly but the actual Bid Probabilities would be 50/50-ish. I then thought about other hand combinations surrounding A-x and considered that perhaps A-x "wasn't just about as good as a Singleton". In other words, most hands with this 1C/Strong NT feature should probably be opened 1 NT, maybe significantly more often.
It's too early for daiquiries so what to do?
THNX,
CW
You might want to look at Revision Precision by John Montgomery at Dan Neils site.
He used a 16-18 NT.
I played Precision with John using a 15-17 1NT.
You will likely find Ax is not "as good as a singleton."
Partner tends to devalue KQx opposite a singleton. Opposite Ax you have 3 winners.
Also a singleton opposite zero values is often making more tricks.
You are using a 30 point deck and game/slam makes with less HCP.
#3
- Group: Members
- Posts: 32
- Joined: 2017-March-21
Posted 2018-January-15, 14:28
spotlight7, on 2018-January-15, 14:17, said:
You might want to look at Revision Precision by John Montgomery at Dan Neils site.
He used a 16-18 NT.
He used a 16-18 NT.
I have the 4th ed. on my computer. As stated earlier in another Post, I looked a a "Diamond Positive" Precision in the '70s. Montgomery did a wonderful job with the concept and I still study it.
Quote
I played Precision with John using a 15-17 1NT.
Always willing to listen to anyone with a story on this fine System. Tell us more...
Quote
You will likely find Ax is not "as good as a singleton."
Partner tends to devalue KQx opposite a singleton. Opposite Ax you have 3 winners.
Also a singleton opposite zero values is often making more tricks.
You are using a 30 point deck and game/slam makes with less HCP.
Partner tends to devalue KQx opposite a singleton. Opposite Ax you have 3 winners.
Also a singleton opposite zero values is often making more tricks.
You are using a 30 point deck and game/slam makes with less HCP.
Thank you VERY much.
CW
#4
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 342
- Joined: 2009-March-21
Posted 2018-January-15, 16:17
1Wishbone1, on 2018-January-15, 14:28, said:
I have the 4th ed. on my computer. As stated earlier in anther Post, I looked a a "Diamond Positive" Precision in the '70s. Montgomery did a wonderful job with the concept and I still study it.
Always willing to listen to anyone with a story on this fine System. Tell us more...
Thank you VERY much.
CW
Always willing to listen to anyone with a story on this fine System. Tell us more...
Thank you VERY much.
CW
I played several decades with John as a partner. We mostly played KS.
I do not recall why we switched to Precision. I had been playing Precision
with a 15-17 1N. When we started Precision, the 15-17 1N range was continued.
John is an excellent player and writer. I played several decades of 12-14 KS
style 1NT with him and several more years of Precision style.
The 1N range rarely matters, it is more a choice of what you enjoy playing.
I also played 9-11 and 10-12 1N as well as 17-20 in The Power System.
I currently use 14-16 1N with 1C*-1D*-1N as 17-18
and 1C*-1D*-1H*(Kokish style)-1S*-1NT 19-20.
#5
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 342
- Joined: 2009-March-21
Posted 2018-January-17, 18:52
1Wishbone1, on 2018-January-15, 14:28, said:
I have the 4th ed. on my computer. As stated earlier in another Post, I looked a a "Diamond Positive" Precision in the '70s. Montgomery did a wonderful job with the concept and I still study it.
Always willing to listen to anyone with a story on this fine System. Tell us more...
Thank you VERY much.
CW
Always willing to listen to anyone with a story on this fine System. Tell us more...
Thank you VERY much.
CW
"Power Precision"(from the late 70s) used a Precision base with a 15-17 1N.
"Precision in the 90s" presented the basic system and in the second half of the book he suggested many options.
"Viking Precision" is a more modern version using a lot of relay bidding.
#6
- Group: Members
- Posts: 32
- Joined: 2017-March-21
Posted 2018-January-17, 19:18
1. Thanx again, spotlight7. Was your time with Revision Precision enjoyable? Any major holes you didn't like?
2.
To review a bit for those not familiar with the idea of this Thread:
See for ex.: http://www.whidco.co...g_Precision.htm
"Some Probabilities
What are the typical hand types for a precision 1C opener? Better than 85% of the hands opened 1C (discounting freak distributional hands with fewer than 16 HCP) have from 16-19 HCP. And, 47.6% of the hands with 16 or more HCP will be balanced (4x3, 4-4-3-2, or 5-3-3-2). So, when your opponents open 1C, better than 40% of the time, they will have a 16-19 no trump, and, when they don’t they will be balanced or semi-balanced (adding in the 5-4-2-2, and 6-3-2-2 hands) about 65% of the time.
Philosophy of Defending Against 1C Openers
So, when your opponents open 1C, more often than not, they will not have shortness, and, most of the time, they will have between 16 and 19 HCP. This tells us that it is highly likely that your side does not have a game, and you should devise your defense to a 1C opener based on that. Most pairs playing against strong no trumps are not looking to find the best GAME when their opponents open 1NT, so neither should you when your opponents open a strong 1C..."
As always, I am sure that there are those who would disagree with the Defensive Premise here. OK. For those Bell-Curvers out there who would look at Defense for the most common 1 ♣ Open, a 1 NT = 16 - 18 HCPs puts pressure on this idea. Opening a 1 ♣ with the higher probability of a singleton or void in that 16 - 18/19 range should bring a greater advantage to the Precision pair. 1 ♣ becomes a more powerful Open. BTW, I don't believe that this will make anyone tremble. Good players will adapt to just about any NT range. It's simply that pairing the Strong NT with the Precision Club seems to be a good idea.
2.
spotlight7, on 2018-January-15, 16:17, said:
The 1N range rarely matters, it is more a choice of what you enjoy playing.
To review a bit for those not familiar with the idea of this Thread:
See for ex.: http://www.whidco.co...g_Precision.htm
"Some Probabilities
What are the typical hand types for a precision 1C opener? Better than 85% of the hands opened 1C (discounting freak distributional hands with fewer than 16 HCP) have from 16-19 HCP. And, 47.6% of the hands with 16 or more HCP will be balanced (4x3, 4-4-3-2, or 5-3-3-2). So, when your opponents open 1C, better than 40% of the time, they will have a 16-19 no trump, and, when they don’t they will be balanced or semi-balanced (adding in the 5-4-2-2, and 6-3-2-2 hands) about 65% of the time.
Philosophy of Defending Against 1C Openers
So, when your opponents open 1C, more often than not, they will not have shortness, and, most of the time, they will have between 16 and 19 HCP. This tells us that it is highly likely that your side does not have a game, and you should devise your defense to a 1C opener based on that. Most pairs playing against strong no trumps are not looking to find the best GAME when their opponents open 1NT, so neither should you when your opponents open a strong 1C..."
As always, I am sure that there are those who would disagree with the Defensive Premise here. OK. For those Bell-Curvers out there who would look at Defense for the most common 1 ♣ Open, a 1 NT = 16 - 18 HCPs puts pressure on this idea. Opening a 1 ♣ with the higher probability of a singleton or void in that 16 - 18/19 range should bring a greater advantage to the Precision pair. 1 ♣ becomes a more powerful Open. BTW, I don't believe that this will make anyone tremble. Good players will adapt to just about any NT range. It's simply that pairing the Strong NT with the Precision Club seems to be a good idea.
Page 1 of 1