BBO Discussion Forums: Flannery - BBO Discussion Forums

aguahombre, on 2011-December-11, 15:25, said:

This may be true (although it's not clear that there is always room for either side to show extras if the bidding starts say 1♥ 2♦ 2♠ 3♠, no matter if neither, either or both players have extras). But surely it can only help to be able to differentiate strength as well as shape. i.e if it is possible to reach the right level most of the time without this differentiation, then it must be either easier to reach it with the extra sequences, or possible to reach it on even more hands.

ArtK78, on 2011-December-11, 12:37, said:

A reverse is by definition "a non-jump bid in a new suit that bypasses a bid in a lower-ranking suit already bid by the same player". So when the auction goes 1♦-2♣-2♠, 2♠ is a "true reverse" (which is a redundant phrase) whatever it "shows".

We use Flannery as an integral part of the GCC-legal version of Real Diamond Precision and it works OK. But in saner jurisdiction (including the ACBL Mid-Chart), I much prefer Kaplan Interchange, freeing up 2♦ for preemptive use. In RDP, the version of KI we use, we bid 1♠ with 0-4 spades and 1NT shows 5+ spades. Opener rebids 1NT over the 1♠ response with the Flannery hands (we don't need it for balanced hands.)

Many prefer the reverse to show additional values if playing 2/1. Agree with EricK. perhaps, erick, the answer is that many of these players employ the weasel convention.

aguahombre, on 2011-December-11, 15:25, said:

You don't need a "jump"
I subscribe to EricK's position ( post # 19 ) of Opener rebidding 2H! ( artificial ) with ANY minimum.
I go further with Responder then using 2S! to artificially "ask" for further description :
1H - 2m!
2H! - 2S!
??
..2NT = NO 4 cards Sp
..3C/3D/3H/3S = all show 4 cards Sp as well overall shape... analogous to some type of Flannery reply:
..3C = 4 5 3 1
..3D = 4 5 1 3
..3H = 4 6 , then can further "ask" where shortness is located.
..3S = 4 5 2 2

Alternatively, there is the added bonus for Opener to show "extras" ( w/ or w/o 4 cards Sp ):
1H - 2m!
??
..2NT = NO 4 cards Sp, but extras
.. 2S = 4 cards Sp and extras

Flannery has been discussed before. I came across this thread by Yzerman in the Advanced and Expert Forum http://www.bridgebas...ty-of-flannery/

This is what he had to say about Flannery:

I was prompted to write a small argument for the Flannery cause because of the recent Multi thread (in beginners section). Personally, I have found the gains of playing Flannery far outweigh the risk and my opportunity cost (with respect to other conventions is at a minimum). I have been repeatedly bashed over the years for playing this "archaic" and "simplistic" and "ineffective" convention, but guess what, I have NEVER got to wrong contract because of Flannery.

Why do I like Flannery?

a) I REFUSE to rebid a 2 card club suit after forcing NT
b) I REFUSE to rebid a relatively poor 5 card heart suit
c) Constructive preemptive value
d) The ability to play 4H or 4S from either hand (via South African xfers)
e) Responder has a roadmap regarding hand evaluation
f) Constructive game/slam bidding

Why do I prefer Flannery over Multi?

a) My suits are disclosed (no guessing or asking)
b) Luxury of playing @ 2 level in a misfit (4/3 or 5/2)
c) I don’t really care about preempting a hand with 5 card major and 4 card minor (In the back of every bridge players mind when they open 2H or 2S Dutch Multi, there is the fear of going for phone number - not the case with Flannery).

Over my 4 years of playing Flannery and experimenting with different caveats, I have found that a few additional conditions optimize the overall effectiveness;

a) NEVER open 2D with a void (4504, 4540, 4603, 4630)
b) NEVER open 4513 or 4531 with 2 bad suits (rebid fragment upon forcing NT)
c) Have sound agreements with respect to game tries
d) Overall, have a good Flannery structure, don’t just play Flannery for the sake of playing Flannery

And a quick story to support my argument. Playing in a regional swiss event a year or two ago, we were paired against one of best teams in field (Roman/Grosvenor team). My partner opened 2D and as my RHO passed, he commented in his usual jovial, humorous way, "Flannery is the worst convention ever created". We proceeded to have a constructive auction to 7S as my partner was able to describe a picture 4612 hand (AQxx AKxxxx). The pair at the other table (two professional players) got to 4S (obviously not well bid, but I am not sure they will get to 7 even if they bid past 4S).

Yzerman’s thread received 26 replies for anyone else interested in this topic and wanting to read them. http://www.bridgebas...ty-of-flannery/

32519, on 2011-December-12, 07:36, said:

When I read points a) and b), my thoughts were, "It doesn't sound like they've worked out 1H-P-1S should strongly imply five cards. It feels like they are just playing Flannery for the sake of playing Flannery". This made me laugh when I got to point d)!

32519, on 2011-December-12, 07:36, said:

I have never heard anyone say that the reason for their dislike of Flannery (or even part of the reason) is that it leads to the wrong contract. The reason is generally the use of a potentially useful bid for a relatively low-frequency occurrence. i.e. Flannery hands come along quite rarely. Should we waste a bid on them or use that bid for a more frequent hand type?

Take "super-Flannery" for example (a set of conventions I have just made up - although I wouldn't be surprised if someone hasn't done it already!):
2♥ = 4♠5♥ opening values, less than reversing values
2♦= 4♥ 5♦ opening values, less than reversing values, <4♠
2♣ = 4♦ 5♣ opening values, less than reversing values, no 4cd major
(If you like you can add 1NT = 4♥ 5♣ opening values, less than reversing values, <4♠: Super-duper Flannery)
These bids would help your constructive bidding in much the same way Flannery does, and you would generally get to the right contract when they come up, and would also get to the right contract more often when you open 1♣/♦/♥ and partner can eliminate these hand types. But that is not the whole story. The question you need to ask is whether it is worth giving up 3 or 4 opening bids to deal with these hand types? Do you gain or lose IMPs/MP by this trade?

Antiflannery is a two-level opening that shows five spades and four hearts. It's defined in, amongst other places, the guide to completing the WBF convention card, the Bridgeguys glossary, and Wikipedia.

I think it's mainly used in Canape systems, for much the same reasons as people play Flannery in standard systems.

gnasher, on 2011-December-12, 08:48, said:

Aha, a third candidate for the name of 1D-P-2H showing five hearts and four spades. Previously I was undecided between "Responder's Flannery" and "Reverse Responder's Reverse Flannery", but I think "Responder's Reverse Antiflannery" is the winner.

What about "Yrennalfitna Srednopser"?

- As people have said, ANTI-FLANNERY is an opening, showing the hand type that's as hard to show in canape systems as the Flannery hand is to show in straight-up 5cM systems. Reverse Flannery Responses are the same kind of hand, but (as should be obvious) are responses. I've never played (against) Anti-Flannery, mostly because I've played against two canape systems in my life.

- Flannery auctions are great when they come up. Of course, so are Weak 2♦ auctions. Playing Flannery makes 1♥ opening continuations easier. When Flannery right-sides the contract, it's nice; when it wrong-sides it, not so much (though, granted, it's much less likely to).

- Re: Alertability (at least in the ACBL), from the Alert Procedures:

Quote

- Re: 1♥-2m; 2♠ and extra strength: one of the reasons I dislike playing the style of 2/1 common in Western North America is that this auction does *not* show extras (which is what I'm used to from out East). Sure, there's "lots of time" to show extras, it just turns out that it doesn't happen, and we can be at 4m and *still* not know if partner has anything extra (and sure that partner does not know that I have anything extra, so I can't just bump the decision off to her). What that means with Flannery is argued above, of course.

This discussion about opener showing extras or not has been going on forever and I just dont think anyone really is moved by it.

Those who prefer to limit their hand and not show shape do it,those you prefer to show shape and have pard just assume they are minimum do it.

If we break the hands into say roughly 3 boxes:
10-13
14-16
17+

One and three are pretty easy to handle, it is the middle box that is the tough one for the shape over power guys. You choose to live with the problem or not.

Same debate over rebid if a major can just be 5 often:
1M=2m
2M?

1h=2m
2s(does not promise extra)=3s(non dead minimum, otherwise unlimited)
etc.

---


ahh that is why no one alerts, we assume pard has 3+
1h=1nt
2c

Argument against Flannery:

In his book Better Bridge for the Advancing Player, Frank Stewart writes that he doesn't use Flannery for a number of reasons. The main reason that he describes is that many (most?) players who do use Flannery ignore suit quality when making the bid: if their distribution is 4=5=x=(4-x) and they have 11 - 15 HCP, they trot out 2♦, regardless. He finds that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages (for his partnerships), but encourages the reader to weigh the costs and benefits and decide for himself.

mike777, on 2011-December-12, 12:11, said:

Mike's reply here has touched on another very interesting topic: Showing shape early versus showing strength. Awm started a topic titled "Shape First." You can find it here http://www.bridgebas...14-shape-first/
Here is an extract from his thread: But one thing that seems almost universal in bidding trends is that showing shape early is good.
Readers of these forums are encouraged to see the rest of awm's post. It is very thought provoking.

32519, on 2011-December-12, 23:28, said:

There is a reason why showing shape early is an excellent principle: it puts you in a better position if the opponents compete. But on some auctions this is hardly relevant. 1♥ (P) 2♣GF (P) is one of them. Whether we rebid 2♥ to show our strength or 2♠ to show our shape, the opponents are hardly likely to suddenly enter the auction.

Another thing that I'm surprised that none of the ACBL members has mentioned is that 1♥-1♠ showing a Forcing NT and denying (4)5+ Spades is Midchart and not GCC, so for most tourneys it is illegal. This sequence makes it a tad challenging to show the kinds of hands Flannery easily cover. I don't play it with anybody, but I highly prefer it to Weak 2♦.

In an external thread Chip Martel says why he plays Flannery. You can read it here http://groups.google...b9260d393?pli=1

The SAYC and 2/1 Discussion Forum had a thread titled "How to play Flannery in 2/1." One solution posted is to use “Kaplan Interchange” You can read the rest here http://www.bridgebas...flannery-in-21/

I hate flannery and will not play it unless under "absolute coercion" (i.e. at gun point).

Reasons:

1. I hate it (99%)
2. It's a waste of a bid that can be better used (1%).