1M-4M auctions in Precision
metobillc
4S directly on hands such as:
K65 AQ K82 J9876
(this example is taken from Berkowitz & Manley's Precision Today).
Partner might have AQxxx xx x, or AKxxx or AQxxx Kxx AQxxx void, where
I'd want to be in slam. So I'm wondering whether to accept this as
statistically unlikely in return for making the auction difficult for
the opponents, or whether my criteria for the direct game raise should
be reduced to hands where I can't imagine slam opposite an opener with
2 AK fifth suits (or the equivalent).
If I choose the first approach, just how good can my hands with 3-card
support be? 4-card support?
If I choose the second approach, I can put a bunch of hands into the
forcing notrump, and if partner does not jump shift, make a delayed
raise to game. I lose the preemptive value here, but I can retain my
slam tools for better hands. (In either approach, I think splinters
and the Jacoby raise equivalent should be slam tries.)
Thoughts and comments from experienced Precision/Strong Clubbers would
be appreciated,
Bill Campbell
Nick France
Some of the hands you picture might be opened 1C. In any case by
making 1M-4M a two way bid it gives the opponents a major problem. If
its weak they might want to come in. If its a strong (meaning 3+
trump and opening hand), they will regret coming in.
Slam when you have a relatively balanced 13-15 is very remote to worry
about it.
Nick France
rich
>
> - Show quoted text -
I agree completely. The 1M-4M auction is one of my favorite tools in
precision. Even good opponents have messed up to the tune of 1100 by
assuming we "must" have the preemptive version of the two way bid and
getting involved in our auction.
Rich Regan
paul
I'm not a big fan of bidding 1H-4H or 1S-4S on normal game-forcing
hands. If the opps bid over your jump, partner is in the dark. I
recommend 1M-3NT as a bad 4333 raise (any 4-card suit, 13-15 hcp.)
That leaves room for a slam try and also clues partner in that you
have high cards rather than shape if the opps compete. With 13-15 and
2344, responder can afford a 2/1 bid in a minor.
sawdust
We find the preemptive value of a jump to game significant
when it is a wide ranging jump like this. Use it on quacky
hands, that make slam unlikely. Yes, partner is also unable
to read it, but the hands that can make a slam opposite a
quacky jump to game are rare.
Your opponents will not know whether you are bidding the
game on strength or on length in partner's suit. So if they
compete to a game of their own, you may be able to wield
the axe.
Another virtue of this is on the opening lead. If you know
you surely want to be in game and no more, why give them
too much information on which to base their opening lead?
John
henry...@yahoo.com
When I jump raise 1M to 4M in a Precision context, it is either
preemptive OR what the british sometimes call 'a pudding raise,' 12-14
hcps, poor controls, not a lot of slam interest unless opener has a
perfect fitting maximum. So, I would be willing to raise either major
to 4 holding
Qxx
Kxx
KJxx
Axx
because I think it is unlikely that opener has, e.g.,
AKxxx
AQxxx
Qx
x
part of 'open light unbalanced, open sound balanced' means that if
opener is light, he will have some shape, and that shape might be
enough to get home a thin game with declarer's advantage.
Henrysun909
OldPalooka
If your partner holds the perfect max, you still need to have the
perfect auction.
Yes, you can bid 1NT and game. The opps will sometime find the
killing lead thanks to the extra information [your auction suggests a
passive lead if you are not dealt an obvious combination, passive
leads against weak preempts are not known to be big winners]. That is
the same cost as missing slam, and I suspect it is much more likely.
Not to mention overtricks at matchpoints due to a blind lead. Not to
mention the terrible pressure when it is (1S)-P-(4S) to you and you
hold an attractive 5 loser hand.
I also rebelled 40 years ago when I first dabbled. I fought the law
and the law won.
-- Bill Shutts
boblipton
It is one of the principal advantages of a precision auction that this
can be done and the opponents will have no idea of what is going on.
Of course, they nevr do, but neithe does partner and sometimes they
strike lucky.
Bob
metobillc
What I am looking for is a well-defined upper bound on how good a hand
I can have to raise directly to game without compromising slam chances
too much, in particular for hands with 3-card support. Something like
"at most 14 HCP, 8-loser hand or worse, at most 4 controls, no
singleton or void" or some combination of these factors, and a similar
recommendation for 4-card support. Then moderately stronger hands can
go in the forcing notrump, and significantly stronger hands into
splinters or the Jacoby equivalent. With a decent starting point, I
can run some simulations, and see how often the game raise misses
slams to determine whether the rules need adjustment.
Bill Campbell
OldPalooka
Well it seems you are close enough now to start simulating. One
constraint to consider adding, you should probably not have a 4+ small
side suit with a max so you cannot have a magic 5-3 or 6-3 fit with
partner's singleton. Another reasonable constraint is that since you
are giving up an advantage, you should treat slams in the 50-60% range
as break even rather than should be in slam.
danny...@gmail.com
hand, you can relax and have a standard auction.
castigamatti
This hand AQxxx Kxx AQxxx void is a 1C opening in my opinion. I am not
playing Precision but I have had the pleasure to read the book and I
believe that this is a 1C opening, they are stating at one point that
some 15 hcp hands with controls and shape should be opened with 1C.
This is not AQxxx xx x AKxxx and the missed borderline slams are rare
and not worth the trouble.
B.R.
Will in New Haven
Stretching to open an artificial force in a bidding contest is often a
good policy. Throw in an extra Jack and it might still be better to
start showing your suits. This is less true when one of your suits is
Spades, of course.
--
Will in New Haven
Nick France
>
> - Show quoted text -
If the opponents bid over your jump to 4 of the major and you have a
real opener you double. Partner will not be in the dark.
Nick France
Nick France
>
> - Show quoted text -
I would think a hand that evaluates to 16+ points would be too good as
there is a reasonable chance of slam. This means HCP + distribution.
Also like it to be no more than a 6 loser using LTC The Hand you gave
of
Kxx
AQ
Kxx
J9xxx
is 13 HCP and nothing for distribution. I don't count the first
doubleton when I only have 3 trump, Also I have 6 points in my
doubleton, I wouldn't count any distribution points even with 4
trump. using LTC its an 8 loser hand so again not close. Let's
change the hand to
Kxxx
x
Axx
AQxxx
And I have 13 points but it is so much stronger. Its a 6 loser hand
and 4 trump, I would add one point for 9 trump, 3 for the singleton
and 1 for the good 5 card suit. That's 5 more points making the hand
potentially worth 18 points (ok that might be a little high but not by
much). Now I wouldn't want to sign off in 4H without first looking
for a potential slam.
Nick France
castigamatti
18? It is a 16 that goes up to 19 if the singleton fits, and to 22
with a double-fit as well, very simple really.
B.R,
dak...@aol.com
tricks if fit not considered? Then as a matter of course some 1M-4M
miss slam.
Try limiting 1M to 6 losers if 5 controls; 5 losers if 4 controls.
Then responder's slam tries need 4+ controls and exceptional playing
hopes or 6+ controls hoping to hear 'good' stuff. Rest may be
tactical.
The very point of 1C forcing is to limit other bids by collecting big
hands in 1C. Sabotage that intent by pure 'point counting' if you
insist. See that slam missed is that price.
pgmer6809
ONe piece of advice I read somewhere was that you might look for slam
if you think it makes opposite a minimum, with the perfect singleton.
(Looking for a perfect max is greedy.)
The other piece of advice comes from Meckstroth who says, "I hate
going down in slams. I would rather lose the 13 IMPS by not bidding
one, than by bidding one and going down."
Presumably he would rather bid and make more games, some of which
probably should not be made, than have the occasional perfect slam
auction. Also consider that the other table may not bid the slam
either, so you will not lose by not bidding it.
Nick France
>
> - Show quoted text -
Point count is more a potential value to the hand if it fits
Nick France
Alan Malloy
This "rule" is usually stated more like "If a perfect minimum from
partner makes slam 100% laydown, then explore for slam". The bit about a
singleton is unnecessary (if a singleton makes the hand "perfect", then
include one, otherwise don't), but "if you think it makes" is
misleading: this would have you hunting for slams that are, say, 75%
opposite a perfecto. That can't be a good strategy.
>
> The other piece of advice comes from Meckstroth who says, "I hate
> going down in slams. I would rather lose the 13 IMPS by not bidding
> one, than by bidding one and going down."
> Presumably he would rather bid and make more games, some of which
> probably should not be made, than have the occasional perfect slam
> auction. Also consider that the other table may not bid the slam
> either, so you will not lose by not bidding it.
You won't lose actual IMPs (ie, your scorecard won't have a negative
number), but you'll give up IMPs you could have won. Whether or not the
other table bids slam, you are costing yourself exactly 13 IMPs by
making the wrong decision:
1) The other table has made the wrong decision: now your wrong decision
wins you 0 IMPs instead of 13
2) The other table has made the right decision: now your wrong decision
wins you -13 IMPs instead of 0.
The difference in both cases is 13, which is why it is a good idea to
bid slams which are better than 50%.
I also don't get your comment about making games he shouldn't have made.
If he's considering looking for slam, it seems unlikely that the hand
cannot produce a game. Granted, you will make more games if you never
bid slams, but few of them will be games you should have gone down in.
--
Cheers,
Alan (San Jose, California, USA)
henry...@yahoo.com
Shading HCP requirements for a strong club that doesn't include both
majors AND doesn''t include good intermediates in both suits is asking
for trouble of the sort 1c (2c) dbl, showing unbiddable values, (4c) ?
Henrysun909
castigamatti
wrote:
In one word, this is priggishness.
B.R.
henry...@yahoo.com
Care to explain yourself??
Henrysun909
castigamatti
castigamatti
Let's just say that missing grand slams is not my forte.
Me Partner
1S 4S
All pass
Partner
S Kxxxx H Axx D KJx C xx
B.R.
castigamatti
Or say...
1C - ( 2C ) - 2S - ( 4C )
4S - ( P ) - 4NT- ( P )
5NT-( P ) - 6D - ( P )
7S All pass
B.R.
Michael Angelo Ravera
> I've been wondering about recommendations I've seen for raising 1S to
> 4S directly on hands such as:
>
> K65 AQ K82 J9876
>
> (this example is taken from Berkowitz & Manley's Precision Today).
>
> Partner might have AQxxx xx x, or AKxxx or AQxxx Kxx AQxxx void, where
> I'd want to be in slam. So I'm wondering whether to accept this as
> statistically unlikely in return for making the auction difficult for
> the opponents, or whether my criteria for the direct game raise should
> be reduced to hands where I can't imagine slam opposite an opener with
> 2 AK fifth suits (or the equivalent).
>
> If I choose the first approach, just how good can my hands with 3-card
> support be? 4-card support?
> If I choose the second approach, I can put a bunch of hands into the
> forcing notrump, and if partner does not jump shift, make a delayed
> raise to game. I lose the preemptive value here, but I can retain my
> slam tools for better hands. (In either approach, I think splinters
> and the Jacoby raise equivalent should be slam tries.)
>
> Thoughts and comments from experienced Precision/Strong Clubbers would
> be appreciated,
If partner will upgrade most "rule of 25" hands and some "rule of 24"
hands, you may make the fast game arrival with any suitable hand that
you'd not consider upgrading to a 1C opener yourself.
If partner will never upgrade even a "rule of 25" hand, there is
basically no such thing as a hand that can bid game through strength
opposite a minimum opener which won't make slam ooposite a "rule of
25" hand with a singleton and a void.
One of the advantages of precision systems is that, anytime opener
doesn't open the forcing 1C, he has limited himself to a narrow range.
If the opener's range is too wide, you must pursue slam opposite some
hands where the 5-level isn't safe (in fact may not even make 4 if
defenders get too much information).
The "Makes game, but doesn't make slam" window is only about 1.5
tricks. If opener's range is nearly this wide, you are aiming at a
very small target. It is for this reason that Standard bidders make no
pretense about the fact that "all game forcing bids are slam curious".
Even 12-19 openers have this problem. It's basically a 3-trick range.
If game is easy opposite 12, a grand can not be discounted opposite
19. People who open "Shapely 8 to a bad 23" extend the range a full
trick on either side of this. What you need to have to invite opposite
a shapely 8 should make a grand pretty easily opposite a bad 23.
henry...@yahoo.com
Let's just say that if my partner felt that
Kxxxx
Axx
KJx
xx
was worth a raise to 4M in a precision context, when I would easily
have, say,
Axxxx
xx
x
AKxxx
and have a play for slam, then said partner would have mis-evaluated
his hand.
the jump to 4M means that responder is only interested in slam if
opener has a perfect fitting maximum without a lot of shape. It is
typically a balanced 3 or 4 card raise (and usually a 4333 hand)
because, amazingly enough, those hands usually don't make slam unless
opener has a perfect fitting maximum.
on the other hand, Meckstroth once raised 1H to 4H holding something
akin to
Ax
KQx
JTxxxxx
x
I personally would not have, since as little as
xxx
Axxxx
AK
xxx
gives you play for slam, but obviously (well, obviously to almost all
of us), if a multiple Bermuda Bowl champion thinks it is right to bid
4h, then his judgment is entitled to respect even if we disagree with
him.
Henrysun909
castigamatti
Not only Meckstroth, some examples are given in the aforementioned
book as well, it is frequency that matters, the entire Precision
bidding system is constructed with that in mind.
B.R.
pgmer6809
make the right decision.
And since we are talking about 50% slams here, sometimes you will be
right and sometimes not.
Whether you are costing IMPs or gaining them, depends on whether you
bid it or not and whether it makes or not.
If you dont bid it and they do, and it makes, -13.
If you dont bid it and they do, and it fails +13.
If you bid it and they dont and it makes +13.
If you bid it and they dont and if fails -13.
Of course if both tables bid the same, whether game or slam, then the
gain is zero, regardless of the actual result.
If you KNOW the slam is 50% exactly then the odds favor not bidding
it.
Because your gain versus loss on a mathematical basis is +13 or -13
either way (i.e you will average zero in the long run.)
However there is the finite chance that the other table will not bid
it even if it is right to do so.
So that tilts the decision (however slightly) against a slam that is
exactly 50%.
>
> The difference in both cases is 13, which is why it is a good idea to
> bid slams which are better than 50%.
Better than 50% yes. But keep in mind that "On a finesse" AND 3-2 (or
even 3-1) trumps is NOT 50%.
>
> I also don't get your comment about making games he shouldn't have made.
> If he's considering looking for slam, it seems unlikely that the hand
> cannot produce a game. Granted, you will make more games if you never
> bid slams, but few of them will be games you should have gone down in.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Alan (San Jose, California, USA)
Regarding the comment about games that might not make, I was referring
to the auction 1M-4M.
If the opps have no idea whether you are close to slam, pre-empting or
just have game, then then are less likely to find the perfect defense
(active, passive, whatever). At Meckstroth's level all the players
know each other and their tendencies; hence it is probably important
for him not to give anything away in the auction, unless there is a
good expectation that it will pay off.