The Boomerang Club

[BonzoDogge]

Hi all.

 

Looking at the hand records for the 1987 Bermuda Bowl final between the USA and Great Britain I noticed that the Flint/Sheehan partnership were playing an artifical system which according to the Wikipedia entry on Flint was called the " Boomerang Club ". Does anyone have any information on this particular bidding system ?

 

Thanks in advance for any help. :)

 

Bonzo D

[Siegmund]

It is mentioned in Roy Hughes's book Building a Bidding System: "This was a normal system, except that the first- and second-chair meanings of Pass and 1C were switched." He doesn't go in to any more detail than that.

 

The 80s World Championship Books usually spend a page on each team's system in the front of the book - but I don't happen to have the 1987 book in my collection.

[PrecisionL]

I have the 1987 World Championship Book:

 

That was the year two pairs on the British Team played strong pass with 1♣ or 1♦ being a fert, 0-7 hcp. There is not much detail given:

 

Flint-Sheehan: Opening pass = standard 1♣ opening, 1♣ = 0-12 hcp, 17-19 bal or strong 2-suit, and weak NT

 

Armstrong-Forrester: Opening pass = any 11-15, 1♣ = strong, 1♦ = 0-6 unbalanced or 0-10 balanced, 1♥/1♠ = 7-10 and 5+ cards or 0-2 cards.

 

The analysis said 2/3 of the time they broke even or had no substantial effect on the result. 16 boards had plus swings (8 major, 8 minor) and 18 boards had minus swings (7 major, 11 minor).

 

Peter Oakley in his pamphlet, The Diamond Major: "Jeremy Flint's Boomerang Club system uses 2-level major-suit opening bids to cover all 2-non touching-suited hands, both weak and strong. The idea is quite ingenious:

 

2

♥

= strong:

♥

+

♣

, or weak:

♠

+

♦

2

♠

= strong:

♠

+

♦

, or weak:

♥

+

♣

The strong combination will have only three or four users."

 

See chapter eight for examples and how to respond: http://www.bridgeclublive.com/Include/Diamond.htm

 

Boomerang Twos may be judged a highly unusual method (HUM) and not be legally accepted for a Pairs contest,

[Free]

Boomerang Twos may be judged a highly unusual method (HUM) and not be legally accepted for a Pairs contest

Why? It's got nothing to do with opening passes or 1-level bids, it's not even a BSC because at least 1 suit is known in the weak version. It's as unusual as a transfer preempt. :)

[PrecisionL]

Why? It's got nothing to do with opening passes or 1-level bids, it's not even a BSC because at least 1 suit is known in the weak version. It's as unusual as a transfer preempt. :)

FOOTNOTE for 3rd Edition, 2000

 

Boomerang Twos may be judged a highly unusual method (HUM) and not be legally accepted for a Pairs contest, when a definite suit must be identified in opening bids of two in a major suit. Diamond Major can in that circumstance adapt these bids as simply WEAK two-suited, 2 Hearts showing hearts and clubs; 2 Spades showing spades and diamonds.

 

Note: This was written in 2000, regulations maybe different in your part of the world or may have changed.

[BonzoDogge]

Thanks for all your replies - all very interesting.

[Free]

FOOTNOTE for 3rd Edition, 2000

 

Boomerang Twos may be judged a highly unusual method (HUM) and not be legally accepted for a Pairs contest, when a definite suit must be identified in opening bids of two in a major suit. Diamond Major can in that circumstance adapt these bids as simply WEAK two-suited, 2 Hearts showing hearts and clubs; 2 Spades showing spades and diamonds.

 

Note: This was written in 2000, regulations maybe different in your part of the world or may have changed.

That's just someone who wrote this footnote not knowing what he/she was talking about. If he/she would've stated that it may be judged an unusual method it would be correct, calling it HUM means something completely different (something clearly defined in the WBF regulations). These regulations haven't changed at all (or perhaps a small detail here or there, but nothing serious) for a very long time.