BBO Discussion Forums: Bidding a 3-4-1-5 hand - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Bidding a 3-4-1-5 hand Playing Precision

Poll: Bidding a 3-4-1-5 hand (10 member(s) have cast votes)

What is your plan?

  1. Open 2C (2 votes [20.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 20.00%

  2. Open 1D, and rebid 1NT over 1S (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. Open 1D, and rebid 2H over 1S (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  4. Open 1D, and rebid 2S over 1S (3 votes [30.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 30.00%

  5. Other (5 votes [50.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 User is offline   r_prah 

  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 53
  • Joined: 2008-September-23
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2012-March-21, 10:42



What is your plan, playing a precision structure where 1♦ = 0+, and 2♣ usually guarantees 6 clubs (or very good 5)?
1

#2 User is offline   wclass___ 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 431
  • Joined: 2008-November-02

Posted 2012-March-21, 11:17

I think i would just open 1NT if i was given such methods.
Seeking input from anyone who doesn't frequently "wtp", "Lol" or post to merely "Agree with ..." --sathyab
0

#3 User is offline   ArtK78 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,786
  • Joined: 2004-September-05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Galloway NJ USA
  • Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
    Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.

Posted 2012-March-21, 11:41

Since the system bid appears to be 1♦, I would open 1♦.

Why would I not rebid 2♣ over partner's 1♠ response? 2♠ would be my second choice.
0

#4 User is online   awm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,375
  • Joined: 2005-February-09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Zurich, Switzerland

Posted 2012-March-21, 11:51

Systemically I open 1d, will rebid 2h over 1s (good spade raise, can be three) or 3d over 1h (very good raise, four trumps and short diamond) or 2c over 1nt (5-card suit, wide range, does not normally have 4+diam).

Obviously your system may differ.
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
0

#5 User is offline   r_prah 

  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 53
  • Joined: 2008-September-23
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2012-March-21, 11:58

View PostArtK78, on 2012-March-21, 11:41, said:

Since the system bid appears to be 1♦, I would open 1♦.

Why would I not rebid 2♣ over partner's 1♠ response? 2♠ would be my second choice.


This would show 5-4 either way in the minors, not just clubs. To my knowledge, this is the normal treatment in a precision framework.
1

#6 User is offline   mgoetze 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,942
  • Joined: 2005-January-28
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cologne, Germany
  • Interests:Sleeping, Eating

Posted 2012-March-21, 12:38

View Postr_prah, on 2012-March-21, 11:58, said:

This would show 5-4 either way in the minors, not just clubs. To my knowledge, this is the normal treatment in a precision framework.


To my knowledge, you're not playing a normal precision framework.
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"
    -- Bertrand Russell
0

#7 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 2012-March-21, 14:13

Isn't this a possible 2♦ opening in Precision? Or, am I way too old-school?
"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

#8 User is offline   r_prah 

  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 53
  • Joined: 2008-September-23
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2012-March-21, 14:35

View Postkenrexford, on 2012-March-21, 14:13, said:

Isn't this a possible 2♦ opening in Precision? Or, am I way too old-school?


You're right, this is a textbook Precision 2♦ opening. At the moment, we are not playing 2♦ as the Precision style opening (which is why 1♦ is 0+, and this deal is a problem).
1

#9 User is offline   Free 

  • mmm Duvel
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,728
  • Joined: 2003-July-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium
  • Interests:Duvel, Whisky

Posted 2012-March-21, 14:43

If you don't play a precision 2♦ opening, then I don't see the problem with opening 1♦ and raising partner's 1♠ response.
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
0

#10 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 2012-March-21, 14:44

View Postr_prah, on 2012-March-21, 14:35, said:

You're right, this is a textbook Precision 2♦ opening. At the moment, we are not playing 2♦ as the Precision style opening (which is why 1♦ is 0+, and this deal is a problem).


Well, if you are playing that a classic Precision 2♦ opening is handled by opening 1♦ as 0+, then it seems obvious to open 1♦.

As an aside, though, you might want to reconsider structure. I agree with your general take of not liking 2♦ as the classic Precision 4-4-1-4/4-3-1-5/3-4-1-5. And, the Precision 2♣ also sucks, which is why you force 6+, I assume. You might like the core that I personally prefer:

2♦ = both minors. 2♥ is an asking bid (2♠=min3♠, 2NT=min no maj, 3♣=min 3♥, 3♦=max no maj, 3M=max 3-piece nat)

2♣ = any 4-4-4-1 (any stiff). 2♦ asks (2♥ nat min, 2♠=min 4144, 2NT+ is max one-under stiff)

1♦ = clubs or diamonds but not both, or balanced

There is a lot more to this, and this is only a taste of the structure. P/M me if you want to know more.
"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

#11 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,693
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2012-March-21, 17:28

2♦: Mexican, GF primary diamonds or balanced 21-22 or balanced 27-28
2♥: Same as "Precision 2♦", some (3-4)(1-0)(4-5), 11-15
2♠: weak 2
2NT: weak 3 level preempt in either minor
3m: good preempt in either minor (you'd be happy to hear partner bid 3NT).
1♦: 2+ diamonds, 11-15 HCP, might have 5 clubs.
1NT: 10-12 balanced.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
0
Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users