Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site cmu-cs-speech2.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!rochester!cmu-cs-pt!cmu-cs-speech2!kfl
From: kfl@cmu-cs-speech2.ARPA (Fu Lee)
Newsgroups: net.rec.bridge
Subject: Re: Precision Bidding
Message-ID: <208@cmu-cs-speech2.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 12-Mar-85 15:47:11 EST
Article-I.D.: cmu-cs-s.208
Posted: Tue Mar 12 15:47:11 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 15-Mar-85 02:45:22 EST
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Lines: 20


Although I don't play precision, I have read a number of books on the
subject.  I think Goren's book and C.C. Wei's first book are very
good introduction to precision, but basic precision that they precisent
is not necessarily more powerful than any scientific approach (against
good prepared opponents).

I have played against many expert precision players, and all of them
have adopted many variations on the basic precision (such as 1D showing
as short as 1-card diamond suit ...).  For the serious tournament
bridge player, I would recommend Ron Anderson's "Matchpoint Precision".
Any intermediate player should be able to understand it thoroughly.

The two reasons I do not play precision are : (1) To make it a truly
better system than Eastern Scientific, it requires a lot of partnership
agreements and memorization.  (2) Al Roth once said Precision is good,
but it takes all the imagination out of bidding.  I agree.

Kai-Fu Lee
kfl@cmu-cs-speech2.arpa