MickyB

Flannery without KI gets you to 1N with 3244 opposite a weak NT as well. Also, you can play transfers after 1H-P-1S natural [5+cards] - 1NT = diamonds, 2C = natural, 2D = 11-13/17+ with hearts, 2H = 14-16. Depending on your rebids over KI, there will be some other messy hands. I think you said you play 1H:1S, 1NT as clubs or balanced, in which case there will be some guesswork on 4144, 4153 and 3154. IMO - Flannery makes sense when playing simple methods over 1H-P-1S Once you are playing Flannery, KI makes sense, as your 0-4♠ response will be by far the most frequent A moderately complex structure works fine without Flannery or KI [1H:1S, 1N = ART, 1H:1N semi-f] I would only play KI without Flannery if I want it to lead into full relays or if playing 1H:1N semi-forcing isn't an option

If 1S is limited, I think it's pretty close which way round 1N and 2C should be. Playing 1NT as diamonds gives you 2C as a Bart-type bid. However, if you want to be able to start with 1S on a GF, it's much better to have 1NT show diamonds, as then having 1H:1S, 1N:2C as a cheap force is huge.

Having thought about this more, maybe I can explain it better. Most people have fairly poor methods after the auction starts 1H:1S. Typical problems include 1H:1S, 2D:3C as the only way to force, and 1H:1S, 2C:2H showing 5-10 points. Some players, especially those who use Flannery, seek to solve these problems by responding 1S less frequently. The former issue is solved by starting with a 2/1 on 4S4m and 4333, the latter by responding 1NT and using Anti-Bart or similar. I've put a lot of work into my methods over 1H:1S. Giving up the natural 1NT rebid has allowed responder to give both good and bad preference at the two-level, solved the issue of 1H:1S, 2m:P where opener has a 5-4 18-count and responder has a 1H3m 9-count, and progress to full relays when responder has a balanced GF. You can achieve a lot of this by using 1H:1S, 1NT to show diamonds, defining 4SF on these auctions as either good preference or a game-force, and playing 1H:1S, 2H:2N as a generic force. I think this is a much better solution than Flannery.

Lol. But yes, it's generally regarded as the most prestigious event on the calendar. It's British rather than English, and until the quarter-finals matches are 48 boards and played privately.

This thread has got me revisiting a system I played briefly a while back with an otherwise similar 1H opening that denied 4 spades. I made a bit of a mess of the responses, using 1NT as a GF relay and 2♣ as 5+♠. Something like 1H:1S, 1NT showing 4H5m with 2♣ PoC and 2♦ relay sounds quite workable in this context, freeing up 1H:1NT to show 5♠.

Responding to such a 1H opening, I'd be inclined to play a KI style structure [now 1N = D, 2C = nat, 2D = 5H4S] that leads on to relays. 1H:1NT could then show 5+spades.

1) Hrothgar basically covered this one. If playing relays I like the transfer openings, right-siding makes a fair difference here. 2) My instinct is that 1S as weaker is better, but it's close for sure. While a direct 1NT is more preemptive, you'll escape a lot of penalties by bidding 1S-X-P "to play opposite four spades". Either way, you'll need to agree whether 1S-P-P invites opener to compete to 2♠ later. There is also the issue of right-siding opposite 14-16 [not a major factor, admittedly]. 3) 1♠ as 14-16 or 20-21 would work well competitively. You want a three point gap between your ranges, because a hand that wishes to compete opposite a 14-count will be happy to game-force opposite a 20-count - this is much like a Polish/Swedish club, where you compete opposite a weak NT and are then game-forced opposite the strong type. Obviously, right-siding here is a bigger issue. A bit more "out there" would be to play 1S as 11-13 balanced or some specific unbalanced strong hands. For example, 4M6m 16-18 feels like a tricky hand to show in competition having opened 1C, or you could look at your uncontested responses and see what hands present a problem. 4) I like it. I think it's a big improvement to play 1D and 1H as promising an unbalanced hand, and if Fantunes can make their two-level openings work than your 2m openings should do well. You didn't mention 44(14), I assume these open 1D?

KJx KQxx Kxxx Qx I think. I assume most will agree with me that the 6♣ bid was not to blame, but still, I thought it was an interesting decision. Unfortunately 5♣ makes.

[hv=pc=n&s=s8hat7daq8ckt9754&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=3sdp]133|200[/hv]

There are various options. 1H:1S, 1NT as 5H4S is the standard version, I believe, but IMO this is better - 1NT = 3+D 2C = 3+C 2D = 5H4S 2H = 6H 11-15 2S = 6H 16+ IMO KI makes more sense with Flannery than without it. Playing Flannery, your forcing NT bid is much more frequent than your 5+spades bid. Playing standard, they are both quite frequent, and the space is more useful when responder shows 4+♠, as all four strains are still in play. Auctions starting 1H:1NT [natural, semi-forcing] are fine anyway. Playing Flannery and KI - 1NT = 3+D 2C = 3+C 2D = 6H 14+ 2H = 6H 11-13

3♠ wtp. Why are people talking about the probabilities of partner holding 4♠ when they could just describe their hand? Especially as partner has kinda gone out of his way to consider contracts other than 3NT. For the 3♥ bidders - 3M here should show values in the suit, it's not usually played as a cuebid for diamonds. The only time cuebids apply below 3NT is 3S when hearts are agreed. You wouldn't usually show values in the suit with Ax(x)(x) because this is a holding that suggests playing a suit contract when partner holds a singleton. Contrast with KJx which may be useless in a suit contract if there is a singleton opposite.

Result stands. When RHO makes a takeout double LHO is very likely to have a club stack. When RHO makes a support double they will often be guessing when to pass. This seems much more significant to me than any implications about spade length with RHO.

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.

Also John Howard [Catch22, I believe]. Congrats, all!

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)!

If you play standard methods over a 1H opening, Flannery solves a few problems. If you play 1H:1S, 1NT as artificial, many of these problems go away. Your auctions will improve sufficiently that you'll want to respond 1S on a weak hand with four cards.

With the balanced invite, how do you follow up over a 3S overcall? Dbl is balanced, 3NT shows real clubs?

If you can easily tell whether partner's card is supposed to be "odd" or "even", it's usually best to start by assuming partner has led from an honour. If you can't easily tell then it can take a bit longer.

I'm not a fan of the spot-card leads Slawinski advocates. His analysis, that "proves" that they are best, ignores that not all spots are created equal - in isolation, you'd rather not lead the nine or ten from low cards or from Hh9x. I've been playing odd-even mixed leads [lowest even card from an even number of cards without an honour or an odd number of cards headed by an honour; without a pip of the right parity, we lead our highest pip]. I wouldn't swear that it's better or worse than other methods, but it's good fun trying to explain it to oppo. It is strictly superior to Fantunes leads, as, on average, the same information is transmitted, but we burn fewer high spot cards. At about the same time, we changed our honour leads vs NT - A from AK K for unblock/count Rusinow from four or more cards, standard from three or fewer [but Q from KQx]. This one I am a big fan of, there have been no situations that I remember where we've had to guess whether partner has led from JTx or QJTx.

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/47864-i-have-created-the-worlds-best-bidding-system/

2S as clubs or invite sounds great in uncontested auctions but it must be fairly awful when the next hand overcalls. What do I do with a maximum but no club fit?

How about something like, "Bids above 3NT are not alertable unless they promise 5+cards in a suit other than the one bid".

Completely backwards imo. The main reason for doubling is to get into the auction when it's our hand, so I'll double on a lot of random 12-counts in 2nd seat that I would pass in third seat. Also, if partner has a maximum passed hand with some shape, he may well be able to double or overcall at the two-level himself, knowing I won't get too excited. I remember being told about a hand with the auction P-1S-X-4S; X-AP, up one. The initial doubler felt that her passed partner should have given her more leeway, but I was unsympathetic - next time, she'll pass and oppo will have stolen from them. It is worth noting that my partnerships open quite light, which makes the difference more pronounced.

The description of 4D removes any ambiguity about the meaning of 4C. I asked someone who played in the Tolle and who had no preconceived idea of what 4C would mean, they too considered it clear from the explanation that the 4H bid showed spades [FWIW I presented the auction without the double of 4C].

Just a random idea, not really thought it through. 2C = 4+C5M 2H = 5S4+H [or possibly 4+S5H or just 5S5H] 3C = natural 2N = something else or possibly 2C = 5S4+round 3C = natural 2N = something else