Flannery

[JLOGIC]

Opening 2♦ is a winner whatever it means. Richard Pavlicek has collected vugraph stats from the major US events and the World Championships for the three most common treatments. These are the figures for when one side opened 2♦ and the other did something else:

 

1996-2012 Flannery (109) 314-224

1996-2012 Multi (295) 701-656

1996-2012 Weak 2D (211) 552-388

 

The bracketed figure is number of occurrences, followed by imps for and against.

 

Flannery gains the most per board, closely followed by the weak two. The multi lags a long way behind, but consider that the other table was usually opening a weak two and it is still a good figure. Multi adherents will also claim to gain more from being able to use 2M for something else.

 

Part of the problem with this analysis is that the flannery pairs are probably 90 % martel/stansby hamman/wolff or hamman/soloway or hamman/zia and levin/wesintein. So we know they are going to be far better than the average pair in the sample.

[Charlie Yu]

Using an opening to describe a specific hand is supposed a winner. The problem is that 2D space could have been used for hands that occur much more common like weak 2D, or hands that are much harder to describe by standard methods like weak two suiter.

[xx1943]

Using an opening to describe a specific hand is supposed a winner. The problem is that 2D space could have been used for hands that occur much more common like weak 2D, or hands that are much harder to describe by standard methods like weak two suiter.

100% agree. Flannery has it merits either as preempt or attempt to score game: 2♦ pass 4♠ and fourth hand has a decent hand and no idea who can win which contract. Declarers hand is completely unknown. The decribed opening hand will be tabled.

[fromageGB]

100% agree. Flannery has it merits either as preempt or attempt to score game: 2♦ pass 4♠ and fourth hand has a decent hand and no idea who can win which contract. Declarers hand is completely unknown. The decribed opening hand will be tabled.

I think you will find the equivalent natural bidding sequence 1♥ p 1♠ X 2♠ p 4♠ has declarer's hand equally unknown. And opener's hand equally known.

[xx1943]

I think you will find the equivalent natural bidding sequence 1♥ p 1♠ X 2♠ p 4♠ has declarer's hand equally unknown. And opener's hand equally known.

After 1♥ pass 1♠ 4th hand has a lot of possibilities to describe his hand but after 2♦ pass 4♠ he has to make a critical decision without knowing anything about partners or RHOs hand.

We had in the last years many very good results and no desaster at all using flannery. The biggest desaster was when I forgot the convention and raised preemptitive to 5♦

LOL

[kenberg]

100% agree. Flannery has it merits either as preempt or attempt to score game: 2♦ pass 4♠ and fourth hand has a decent hand and no idea who can win which contract. Declarers hand is completely unknown. The decribed opening hand will be tabled.

 

 

 

Yes, this is the sort of thing I find useful about Flannery. I still prefer the weak 2♦, and perhaps I would prefer the multi if I took the time, and if there were not so many barriers to playing it here in the good old U.S.A., but Flannery is not a bad convention.

 

I think it is really difficult to accurately evaluate a convention. Take the multi, for example. By itself, it's no great shakes as near as I can see. But if frees up 2M for other uses. Also, the vulnerabilities of the multi need to be effectively exploited or else it will look better than it is. I don't keep track of various laws but it seems the multi used to be allowed in "normal" pairs games, at least I used to encounter it some but not often. Less often now. So pard and I agreed to play the acbl defense, simple version. This seemed adequate enough for something we encountered occasionally but not often. If we came across it more, we would have gone for something more substantial.

 

Back to Flannery. Of course people should have agreements on defense. (2♦)-X means what? Diamonds? Strong NT? There are quite a few pairs who don't know, and this can artificially inflate the value of a convention. Or at least I think of it as an artificial benefit. I generally avoid a convention if I think that its strongest plus is that my opponents are probably unfamiliar with proper defense against it.

 

Anyway, I prefer the weak 2, Flannery is ok but not great. That's my two bits.

[y66]

Some excerpts from Steve Weinstein's I love Flannery thread at BridgeWinners:

 

http://bridgewinners.com/media/cache/63/11/63114501d6acbd3e5ba8d4a0dfebeca1.png Bobby Levin

 

I would say the bid that has made us the most money over the years is 2d-(p)-3M which is a mixed raise-you get to thin cold games but more often you make it very difficult for the opponents to get into the bidding. since you can invite by starting with 2nt and then bidding 3 of a major over a shortness response what you need is a way to signoff, make a natural slam try and bid rkc in a given suit. the way we do this is to play over any 3 level response by opener responder bids :

 

4c-relay to 4d to make a non forcing, natural slam try

4d-relay to 4h to place the contract

bid 4h thru 5c as rkc in up the line suits except shortness suits is always 5c, and when opener is 2-2 in the minors 5c is rkc in spades

 

to deal with 4-6 hand we open flannery and if partner bids 2h and we have an exceptional hand we can raise to 3 hearts.

If partner bids 2nt we show our shortness and have the option over a 3nt call by partner to bid 4c showing a good 4h bid or 4d to show a bad 4h bid both with 4-6

 

no more flannery secrets today…….

 

http://bridgewinners.com/media/cache/63/11/63114501d6acbd3e5ba8d4a0dfebeca1.png Bobby levin

 

More Flannery free cheese? Your partner opens 1 heart and you have 5 not great spades and 3 at least decent hearts and a game force. Without Flannery you would have to bid 1 spade because you cant miss the 5-4 spade fit. With Flannery you can see that your 5-3 heart fit will play at least as well as your 5-3 spade fit and can get the auction off to a better start by bidding 2 clubs (of course you alert opponents that 2 clubs could be 2) We have had better slam auctions and in matchpoints there have been many hands where the opponents dont lead a club or lead a spade and lose a vital tempo.

 

http://bridgewinners.com/media/cache/46/69/46692ec3b75f1110285a8a04c9e53d44.png Adam Meyerson

 

A lot of the advantages of Flannery come because standard methods after 1♥-1♠ are pretty bad. Opener has problems deciding what to do with three-card spade support. Responder has a tough time producing a good GF auction after 1♥-1♠-2♦. Both these situations work out better playing Flannery, because the 1♠ response is less frequent and more informative. However, it seems to me that a more direct attack on this problem would be better; for example Kaplan Inversion can find your spade fits and conceal your four-card spade holding. Even on the General Chart you could play artificial rebids by opener after 1♥-1♠ (I like 1NT=balanced or diamonds and 2♦ = good spade raise). These methods can remove most of the negative inference advantages from Flannery. Sure, you get good results when you open 2♦ but other meanings for that opening can easily be both more frequent and more effective.

[MickyB]

Bobby's 2nd point disappears if compared with 1H:2C, 2S not showing extras.

[Charlie Yu]

If Flannery 2D-P-3M was a winner, wouldnt (weak majors)2D-P-3M a bigger winner?