[Chamaco]

mikestar, on Feb 25 2004, 04:02 PM, said:

Most interesting discussion, but the best way to handle the nebulous 1♦ is not to play it.

I'd like to be so sure
Meckwell seem to think otherwise

[mikestar]

For those of us who are or honestly hope to be world class experts, Meckwell's opinion in this matter is highly relevant. And no doubt handling a nebulous 1♦ isn't hard for them, considering how well they do with their frightfully complex 1♣ structure.

Most of us will never get close to that level--I certainly won't. I offer the opinion of a player who has played Precision at a level ranging from fair intermediate to fair Life Master for many years. To my mind, reducing the frequency and difficulty of the 2♣ opening is a worthy goal but the nebuluos 1♦ is too high a price.

Precision gains vs. 2 over 1 on its major suit openings and loses on its 1♣ and 2♣ openings. Play nebulous 1♦ and you reduce but don't eliminate the 2♣ losses but you've increased the frequency and difficulty of 1♦ openings. Now 1♦ loses vs. 2 over 1.

But played as I suggest, 1♦ gains substantially against 2 over 1. It just feels better to have three winning bids vs two losing bids instead of the other way round.

My viewpoint is also colored by my experience with my longest term Precision partnership--we adopted Precision becuase it allowed us to use fewer conventions and compicated sequences than 2 over 1--this is a huge gain in terms of memory strain, and I hate to give so much of that back to play nebulous 1♦.

[the hog]

BTW, has anyone experimented with the 1♦-1♥ relay in Viking?

No, but we played 1D 1H in Symmetric as either natural, or as a GF relay.
In Symmetric relay the 1D opening shows ANY 2-3 suited hand without a 5 card Major; and 2C/D openings show a 6 card suit, no Major - very effective! (Roy Kerr has changed this a bit in the latest version of Symmetric, however).

[cwiggins]

Chamaco, on Feb 25 2004, 03:36 PM, said:

How does Viking club deal with hands with 6 bad clubs ? Open 2 ♣ even if the 3♣ rebid will be awful or open 1♦ and then the 2♣ rebid would show 9 cards in the minors ?

Based on my limited understanding of the Viking Club, the answer to your question is yes with one exception: with 4 diamonds and 6 clubs, you may open 1♦ and then rebid 2♣.

[cwiggins]

I am not sure that the case against a a nebulous diamond is clear cut.

The world class Precision pairs that I know of all use a nebulous 1♦. Sontag-Weichsel did and do. Berkowitz and Cohen also, and they are playing Precision for the same reason as you: to reduce the strain on memory. Groetheim (the author of "The Viking Club") also uses a nebulous 1♦ opening.

On the other hand, I know of no pairs at the world class pairs playing Precision where 1♦ promises 4+.

Sidebar: The European flavors of Precision (per "The Viking Club" and "Precision in the 90s" by Rigal) advocate 5+ clubs for the 2♣ opening compared to the U.S. trend to have 2♣ promise 6+, which means that a 1♦ opening is slightly less nebulous in Europe than it is in the U.S.

In addition to the expert experience, reasons exist for using a nebulous 1♦. Per Rigal from "Precision in the 90s":

"The choice of structuring the system at the outset has to be between three bids. Are we going to overload the 1NT opening (by giving it a four-point range) and the 2♣ opening by permitting it to be on a moderate five card suit, in order to have a clearly defined 1♦ generally guarenteeing four cards in the suit? My preferred answer to that question is no. A four-point range 1NT leads to a lot of guesswork, and a loose 2♣ opening detracts from accuracy there too. It is better to have the imprecision at a lower level, with more of a chance to sort out the problems cheaply."

BTW, Rigal's responses to 1♦ are natural, avoiding the memory strain issue you mention.

Based on these, it seems reasonable to conclude that a nebulous 1♦ is flawed but the best solution to the problems. If someone's experience leads them to conclude otherwise, I understand, but I don't think it is clear cut.

[cwiggins]

The_Hog, on Feb 25 2004, 11:17 PM, said:

BTW, has anyone experimented with the 1♦-1♥ relay in Viking?

No, but we played 1D 1H in Symmetric as either natural, or as a GF relay.
In Symmetric relay the 1D opening shows ANY 2-3 suited hand without a 5 card Major; and 2C/D openings show a 6 card suit, no Major - very effective! (Roy Kerr has changed this a bit in the latest version of Symmetric, however).

The version of Symmetric that I could find on-line was from November 2000. Is "the latest version of Symmetric" available someplace?

Symmetric's solution is like and not like mikestar's suggestion.

It is like mikestar in that balanced hands are opened either 1NT (11-14) or 1♣ (which shows 15+ HCP).

It is unlike mikestar in that 1♦ is nebulous, but it is nebulous in a different way than it is in "normal" Precision.

[the hog]

Chris,
Roy Kerr had a version on his web site where he was selling his Symmetric bidding tool:
www.bridge2symmetric.com

I looked at this site today and it appears out of action. I don't know whether he is keeping it up.

In the old symmetric
1D 1H
1S = S + a minor or a black 3 suiter
1N = H + a minor or a red 3 suiter
2C = long C 4D
2D = long D 4C
2H = 3H, stiff S and 54 in the ms either way.

[hrothgar]

The_Hog, on Feb 26 2004, 04:00 AM, said:

Chris,
Roy Kerr had a version on his web site where he was selling his Symmetric bidding tool:
www.bridge2symmetric.com

I looked at this site today and it appears out of action. I don't know whether he is keeping it up.

Pity that

I bought a copy of B2S a couple years ago
Found it very useful

Unique product idea.

[Cascade]

Symmetric Relays are really an appendage to a system rather than a system in their own right.

I have played at various times

Forcing Pass with Symmetric Relays
Transfer Openings with Symmetric Relays
and Standard Symmetic Relay which is really a variant of Precision with Symmetric Relays added on.

I am not sure exactly what Roy is doing with 1♦. I recall that I changed to playing 1NT as the relay over a 1♦ opening after a long discussion with Roy. I know that Roy has experimented with many front ends to symmetric that is why he developed his bridge2symmetric program. I think I still have an old DOS version of engine of that software that Roy sent to me several years ago.

These are the relays that I currently play over 1♦ 1NT GF relay

2♣ shows hearts
2♦ shows minor two-suiters thereafter the relays are up one step compared to standard symmetric relays for two-suiters
2♥ shows clubs and spades and standard two suited relays follow over 2♠
2♠ shows a black three suiter
2NT and higher show diamonds and spades and follow standard symmetric relays for two suiters

over

...
2♣  2♦ relay

2♥ shows clubs and hearts and standard two suited relays follow over 2♠
2♠ shows a red two three suiter
2NT and higher show diamonds and hearts and follow standard symmetric relays for two suiters

Two Suiter Relays

2NT shortage in higher other suit
3♣ equal shortage 11 or 22
3♦ 5431 lower shortage
3♥ 6421 lower shortage
3♠ 6430 lower shortage
3NT 7420 lower shortage

over 3♣ equal shortage

3♦ = 7411 rare hand type
3♥ = 5422 and zoom into controls

Wayne

PS

Roy has been seen from time to time on BBO

[the hog]

Chris, I looked up my notes: in Kerr's new version 1D 1N is a GF relay rather than 1H being either natural or relay.

Over that:
• 2C: Clubs, possibly a black 3-suiter.
• 2D: 4+ Clubs & 5+ Diamonds
• 2H->: Diamonds, possibly a red 3-suiter.

That is the major difference; there are a few cosmetic differences.

"Symmetric Relays are really an appendage to a system rather than a system in their own right."

Not really sure if I agree with this. I have a copy of the original 1980 publication "The Symmetric Relay", by Walter Jones and Roy Kerr. It is a fully comprehensive system in its own right. It is certainly true as Wayne says that the symmetric engine has been used as a relay basis for many systems - Tres Boof, Scrape, Tosr, Scamp and Moscito to name just a few that come to mind.

[mikestar]

No doubt my viewpoint is colored by my different experience with 4-point NT ranges. I rather like them and often played 15-18 in 2 over 1. An occasional loss due to the wider range, an occasional gain by tightening the NT rebids. On the whole, a wash.

With any non-standard NT range you will have anti-field positions, I beleive these help you and hurt you about equally.

So to my mind, the tradeoff is 1♦ vs 2♣. If, as apparently most experts do, you find that widening the NT range is a big tradeoff, then the decison to use nebulous 1♦ is much more resonable, particularly the 2+ diamonds type. You will never convince me that opening ♠AJxx ♥KQxx ♦void ♣QJxxxx will lead to lasting happiness.

I suspect the extra point NT range causes more loss of accuracy for the expert who has a very high level of accuracy than it does for the average player.

In other words, the "right" tradeoffs vary from partnership to partnership, but are influenced by skill level.

[MarceldB]

hrothgar, on Feb 25 2004, 08:03 PM, said:

The_Hog, on Feb 26 2004, 04:00 AM, said:

Chris,
Roy Kerr had a version on his web site where he was selling his Symmetric bidding tool:
www.bridge2symmetric.com

I looked at this site today and it appears out of action. I don't know whether he is keeping it up.

Pity that

I bought a copy of B2S a couple years ago
Found it very useful

Unique product idea.

I bought a copy too of B2S 1,5 years ago.
Working with a Mac and Windows emulation was not ideal. Reason why I did not used this programm.

I have an additional PC now for such work only. If somebody has a template (Pass = 13+) to start with , that would be very helpfull.

Thanks,
Marcel