[phoenixmj]

A couple of questions here -

1. We have recently started playing Flannery (although I know that a lot of people frown on this bid). I understand that the definition of Flannery is that you have 5 hearts, 4 spades, and 11-15 points. Someone told me today that there is NO wiggle room in the point count - so you can be penalized for bidding Flannery with 10 points or with 16 points if the opponents catch it and call the director. Is this accurate? The 2D bid is alertable and we always give the point count along with the shape when describing the bid (if asked).

2. We play that you need 17 high card points to reverse. Seems to me that the purpose of Flannery is to allow you to show your shape when you do not have the power to reverse. How about 16 HCP - what do you do then?

3. One of the benefits of Flannery for us has been that if partner opens 2D, I know he has 5 hearts and 4 spades. If he opens 1H - I know that he likely has fewer than 4 spades unless he has a big enough hand to reverse. Consequently I do not bid 1S after a 1H open unless I have 5 spades. This allows the bidding to proceed more smoothly.

It has recently occurred to me that impossible 2 spades has a bit of a conflict with Flannery. Suppose partner opens 1H. As mentioned above, I will not bid 1S over the 1H unless I have 5. So the bidding goes 1H, 1N, 2c by opener. But let's say I have 4 spades and I would like to show them now. If I bid 2 spades, is it impossible to spades or is "possible" because we play Flannery and I am now showing my 4 card spade suit.

Very curious to hear especially from Flannery players if this is a true conflict. What am I missing???

[DozyDom]

1 isn't quite accurate. The "there's no wiggle room" advice has been misunderstood by whoever advised you; the rule is that due to the inanity of ACBL regulations you can't routinely open it on a 9-count. Even then I believe if it isn't routine it's acceptable - upgrading truly exceptional 9-counts is fine, though it's hard to think of one unless you allow 6 hearts in the opening. Certainly 10 points is as legal as anything (though if you've put 11-15 on your convention card and you open it with all 10-counts that is illegal). I don't believe there's any upper limit on strength at all so long as they're accurately declared on your card - it just isn't effective to have a hugely wide range, so no one does.

2... if you require 17 points to reverse, you play Flannery as 11-16, openly disclosed as always. Like I say, your adviser has been talking too much about things they don't know enough about.

3, I'm not someone who plays impossible two spades particularly. But I can't think of it as useful to play 2♠ there as natural even when you can have 4 spades. You know your partner has no fit for you, so you're forcing the bidding to the three level without telling partner anything important about your hand. I'd just play it as whatever you used to.

I don't play Flannery with any of my regular partners right now, but I did for a good while. It gets a lot of hate, some of which is justified, but it does make life simpler. Hope I've been of some helps.

[The_Badger]

I have played 2♥ Flannery in this structure:-

2♦Multi (usually weak 2M); 2♥ Flannery; 2♠ Weak 5m/5m

[johnu]

 phoenixmj, on 2019-January-05, 17:48, said:

1. We have recently started playing Flannery (although I know that a lot of people frown on this bid). I understand that the definition of Flannery is that you have 5 hearts, 4 spades, and 11-15 points. Someone told me today that there is NO wiggle room in the point count - so you can be penalized for bidding Flannery with 10 points or with 16 points if the opponents catch it and call the director. Is this accurate? The 2D bid is alertable and we always give the point count along with the shape when describing the bid (if asked).

If you usually bid Flannery with 10 points or 16 points, you don't have an agreement to have 11-15 points. Having 11-15 on your convention card or giving that information verbally is misinformation. Change your convention card to reflect your agreement. If you upgrade from 10 points infrequently, you might use "10+" as the lower limit, or "16-" as the upper limit, etc.

 phoenixmj, on 2019-January-05, 17:48, said:

3. One of the benefits of Flannery for us has been that if partner opens 2D, I know he has 5 hearts and 4 spades. If he opens 1H - I know that he likely has fewer than 4 spades unless he has a big enough hand to reverse. Consequently I do not bid 1S after a 1H open unless I have 5 spades. This allows the bidding to proceed more smoothly.

It has recently occurred to me that impossible 2 spades has a bit of a conflict with Flannery. Suppose partner opens 1H. As mentioned above, I will not bid 1S over the 1H unless I have 5. So the bidding goes 1H, 1N, 2c by opener. But let's say I have 4 spades and I would like to show them now. If I bid 2 spades, is it impossible to spades or is "possible" because we play Flannery and I am now showing my 4 card spade suit.

Very curious to hear especially from Flannery players if this is a true conflict. What am I missing???

Why would you want to show a 4 card spade suit when partner doesn't have 4 spades (partner would have opened Flannery with a weaker hand, or reversed into spades with a strong hand)? Answering my own question, you don't want to show a 4 card spade suit.

[gordontd]

 johnu, on 2019-January-05, 19:09, said:

Why would you want to show a 4 card spade suit when partner doesn't have 4 spades (partner would have opened Flannery with a weaker hand, or reversed into spades with a strong hand)? Answering my own question, you don't want to show a 4 card spade suit.

You might well want to show them if you were playing a forcing NT and had enough values to rebid 2NT but without a stopper in the fourth suit. The alternative use for this bid is to show a very good raise of partner's second suit.

[apollo1201]

 gordontd, on 2019-January-06, 01:58, said:

You might well want to show them if you were playing a forcing NT and had enough values to rebid 2NT but without a stopper in the fourth suit.

Then you don’t necessarily need 4 of them, do you?

It is just a stopper with sth like:
KQx
Ax
xxxx
Qxxx

[gordontd]

 apollo1201, on 2019-January-06, 02:55, said:

Then you don’t necessarily need 4 of them, do you?

It is just a stopper with sth like:
KQx
Ax
xxxx
Qxxx

I guess so.

[rmnka447]

As long as your convention card reflects how you normally play Flannery, you shouldn't get into trouble if you have an occasional variance. But that's more "rarely" than anything else. If you vary from your stated range with any frequency, then you have an implied agreement which is not allowed and is open to adjustment or penalty. If I had to guess, 2 or 3 times a year probably won't get you into trouble. 2 or 3 times a month probably will.

In a similar vein, you should let your opponents know that a 1 ♠ response to 1 ♥ shows 5+. They are entitled to the same information that you have and use to make bidding decisions (raising with 3, etc.).

Way back when forcing NT were first appearing as part of 2/1 back in the late 60s/early 70s, a 2 ♠ rebid by responder after a forcing NT response did show a weak hand with long ♠. But that gave way to the current "impossible" 2 ♠ which is normally used to show a good 10-12 raise of opener's minor rebid suit.

Then the auction --

1 ♥ - 1 NT
2 m - 3 m

can be used as a weak competitive raise to make it difficult for the opponents to compete.

But if opener opens 1 ♠ --

1 ♠ - 1 NT
2 m - 3 m

shows the good 10-12 raise only. There's no mechanism to make a weak competitive raise.

[phoenixmj]

 rmnka447, on 2019-January-06, 04:03, said:

As long as your convention card reflects how you normally play Flannery, you shouldn't get into trouble if you have an occasional variance. But that's more "rarely" than anything else. If you vary from your stated range with any frequency, then you have an implied agreement which is not allowed and is open to adjustment or penalty. If I had to guess, 2 or 3 times a year probably won't get you into trouble. 2 or 3 times a month probably will.

In a similar vein, you should let your opponents know that a 1 ♠ response to 1 ♥ shows 5+. They are entitled to the same information that you have and use to make bidding decisions (raising with 3, etc.).

Way back when forcing NT were first appearing as part of 2/1 back in the late 60s/early 70s, a 2 ♠ rebid by responder after a forcing NT response did show a weak hand with long ♠. But that gave way to the current "impossible" 2 ♠ which is normally used to show a good 10-12 raise of opener's minor rebid suit.

Then the auction --

1 ♥ - 1 NT
2 m - 3 m

can be used as a weak competitive raise to make it difficult for the opponents to compete.

But if opener opens 1 ♠ --

1 ♠ - 1 NT
2 m - 3 m

shows the good 10-12 raise only. There's no mechanism to make a weak competitive raise.

Our convention card shows 11-16 points along with the name Flannery. Today - someone basically said you are not allowed to play Flannery 11-16, it must be 11-15. But we always do disclose if asked after the alert. Hence my question. I gather from the responses that what we are doing is fine as long as we disclose our point range.

I still see a conflict with playing Flannery and wanting to show spades (as a stopper heading towards NT) and playing impossible 2S. How does opener know whether you are showing a robust raise for their 2 club or a stopper in spades - be it a 3 or 4 card spade suit. So - it seems that we would be unable to play impossible 2 spades if we are also playing Flannery. Is my conclusion correct?

I have not seen anyone who plays Flannery alerting/announcing that a 1S response to a 1H open shows 5+ spades, and yet everyone I know who plays Flannery makes this assumption. The 1S is a natural bid so not sure that I understand why it would be alertable.

I read a similar discussion on Walsh bids. If opener makes a bid of 1H or 1S over responder's 1D bid, they are showing an unbalanced hand when playing Walsh. From my reading on current ACBL rules, this is not alertable because the 1H/1S bid is natural. There is a BBO discussion on this point. I gather from that discussion and other sources that it used to be alertable but it is no longer so. Similarly, 1N in Walsh style over responder's 1D response does not deny a 4 card major, but also is not alertable per that same BBO discussion and other things I have read. It seems to me that the assumption that partner has 5S when bidding over 1H falls into a similar category.

Curious as to your views on the Walsh bids. I have seen some people say that the Walsh bids are alertable and I gather that Hardy implied that they were - but that ACBL has taken a stance that this is not the case any more. Hardy's book was prior to many ACBL changes.

Alerting a 1S bid IF it is not necessary could be a problem because you are reminding your partner that you are assuming 5+ spades.

When we first used Flannery, it was quite successful for us. Then, it seems that it has created some problems - largely because of the big point range. Adopting the 11-15 standard has some benefits in this regard, but it seems to defeat the primary purpose of being able to show spades without the power to reverse unless you reverse on 16. We are considering dropping Flannery altogether - but we also see the pluses of keeping it.

Thanks for your help.

[DozyDom]

 phoenixmj, on 2019-January-06, 04:43, said:

Our convention card shows 11-16 points along with the name Flannery. Today - someone basically said you are not allowed to play Flannery 11-16, it must be 11-15. But we always do disclose if asked after the alert. Hence my question. I gather from the responses that what we are doing is fine as long as we disclose our point range.

Yep! Your pal is probably just misinformed.

Quote

I still see a conflict with playing Flannery and wanting to show spades (as a stopper heading towards NT) and playing impossible 2S. How does opener know whether you are showing a robust raise for their 2 club or a stopper in spades - be it a 3 or 4 card spade suit. So - it seems that we would be unable to play impossible 2 spades if we are also playing Flannery. Is my conclusion correct?

This probably sounds facetious, but opener knows which one it is because you make agreements about what bids mean before the auction begins. Hence why I know whether 1C-1H is a transfer or natural with each of my partners.

Anyway, a bit of thought will tell you the conflict has nothing to do with Flannery - showing a spade stop is no more and no less desirable in the auction 1H-1NT-2m-? when playing flannery than when not. Just stick with what you were originally playing and you'll be much less likely to forget.

[Stephen Tu]

 phoenixmj, on 2019-January-06, 04:43, said:

Today - someone basically said you are not allowed to play Flannery 11-16, it must be 11-15.

That someone seems to have invented this restriction out of thin air. The chart has an example section that says a 11-15 range would be permitted, not that it is the only range allowed. The only restriction seems to be in basic events, promise 10+ hcp.

Quote

I still see a conflict with playing Flannery and wanting to show spades (as a stopper heading towards NT) and playing impossible 2S. How does opener know whether you are showing a robust raise for their 2 club or a stopper in spades - be it a 3 or 4 card spade suit. So - it seems that we would be unable to play impossible 2 spades if we are also playing Flannery. Is my conclusion correct?

Not really. I guess you are worried about 4243 11 with 4 small diamonds. To me, since you already bid 1nt, bid 2nt and don't advertise which suit you are weak in, don't worry about it. If partner has doubleton you are likely fine. If singleton sometimes opps are 4-4 or sometimes suit blocks, or sometimes it's the short diamonds on lead and they don't find it. Plus partner can get scientific and show fragment at 3 level when accepting if want to look for 34 spades and 5-2 heart game alternatives.

Plus you have option of just bidding 1s on 4 if really good spades despite allegedly promising 5, if partner raises you can offer nt later just like people not playing Flannery.

2c is wide ranging, IMO having two raises is more important than worrying about invites with 4 small diamonds.

Quote

I have not seen anyone who plays Flannery alerting/announcing that a 1S response to a 1H open shows 5+ spades, and yet everyone I know who plays Flannery makes this assumption. The 1S is a natural bid so not sure that I understand why it would be alertable.

This was once alertable in ACBL, but they got rid of it something like 17 years ago. The idea before was people made assumptions about possible spade length after 1s and 1nt responses without looking at card and seeing if Flannery was on there. But now you have to ask or look at convention cards.

That same alert chart revision also got rid of most alerts related to Walsh.

[phoenixmj]

I just want to thank everyone for the insights into this issue. It has been very helpful. The conclusion I am drawing is that we should play impossible 2 spades because that is too valuable to give up. A 2NT continuation after 1H, 1N, 2m, 2N implies stoppers - so no need to mention the spades since we know that opener does not have 4. So the 1H, 1N, 2m, 2S would be impossible 2 spades and show robust support for the minor rebid.

Thanks so much. I just started using this BB and it is filled with great information.

[rmnka447]

 Stephen Tu, on 2019-January-06, 07:21, said:

Not really. I guess you are worried about 4243 11 with 4 small diamonds. To me, since you already bid 1nt, bid 2nt and don't advertise which suit you are weak in, don't worry about it. If partner has doubleton you are likely fine. If singleton sometimes opps are 4-4 or sometimes suit blocks, or sometimes it's the short diamonds on lead and they don't find it.

Totally agree with this. A 2 NT rebid normally shows a balanced invitational hand with stoppers. You'll probably bid it that way 95% of the time, but hands do come up where 2 NT is sort of a default bid to show an invitational hand as nothing else makes much sense.

One area you might want to discuss with partner occurs on auctions similar to the following --

1 ♥ - 1 NT
2 ♦ - ?

and you hold the following hands:

A) ♠ xxx ♥ x ♦ xx ♣ AQ10xxxx

B) ♠ xxx ♥ x ♦ Qxx ♣ AKJxxx

Neither hand is worth a GF 2/1 response, but neither ♥ nor ♦ looks to be a particularly good contract. The problem is that a 3 ♣ rebid would be descriptive, but impossible for opener to continue properly if it includes both hands. The solution suggested by my teammates (we're all ACBL Gold LM or better) is to bid 2 NT with invitational hands like Hand B and reserve 3 ♣ for weak hands like Hand A as a signoff.

[Stephen Tu]

 rmnka447, on 2019-January-06, 14:16, said:

The solution suggested by my teammates (we're all ACBL Gold LM or better) is to bid 2 NT with invitational hands like Hand B and reserve 3 ♣ for weak hands like Hand A as a signoff.

This is a bit grotesque. Better solutions, if playing 2/1s as GF:
option 1- play 1M-3lower as invitational. Rates to be better partial than 2nt if partner can't accept. Also right-sides the NT sometimes.


option 2 - play impossible 2s as multi-way, invitational in either minor, opener bids 2nt to find out which. (this obv only works when you open 1h)