[Flem72]

Playing Flan. After 1H-(2m)-?, is there virtue in agreeing that the negative double shows 5S, limited? it would seem to be implied as a corollary to Flan, but I wonder -- any experience out there?

[32519]

Flem72, on 2012-March-10, 20:16, said:

Playing Flan. After 1H-(2m)-?, is there virtue in agreeing that the negative double shows 5S, limited? it would seem to be implied as a corollary to Flan, but I wonder -- any experience out there?

You pose an interesting question which hopefully will draw feedback from others as well. In the end it always comes down to system agreements. So making this part of your system agreements, on face value certainly appears worth exploring further. What would the rest of the agreement look like?
I can think of 3 different options for consideration here (there may well be others):
1. Negative doubles
2. Negative free bid
3. Natural with values sufficient to explore for game

Structure 1:
a) 1♥-(2m)-X Playing Flannery, a normal negative double showing 4x♠ is pointless in the sequence posted. Changing it to promise 5 and 6-10 HCP makes sense.
b) 1♥-(2m)-2♠ Natural 5-card suit with 11+ HCP, worth further exploration for game

Structure 2:
Playing negative free bids, the structure may need to change as follows:
a) 1♥-(2m)-X In this sequence the X promises 11+ HCP which will be followed up with a new suit bid, ♠ in your example.
b) 1♥-(2m)-2♠ The 2♠ bid being a negative free bid with 6-10 HCP, a good 5-card suit or a weakfish 6-card suit.

Which structure is better? I have no idea as I have never played it before. Would love to hear from other more experienced players.

[wclass___]

1♥-[2♣]

I think that double should include 5♦+ or 4♦ (what to do with 4♦4♠3♣2♥ ?) is better.
Opener can now bid 2♦ with 3 cards. Double can handle way more hands than just ♦'s, but i'm not willing to go in detail about that.

I would rather use 1♥-[2♣]-2♦ as showing 5♠+ and forcing.

1♥-[2♦]

Double showing (or including) 5♠ has a lot of merit and is probably close to optimal. 1♥-[2♦]-X-[P]-2♠ = 3♠ very very nice...

But i guess one will have to double with 4♠4♣3♦2♥ and 5♣4♠22 as well? Not willing to pass, but not willing to immediately go past 2♥.

[gwnn]

If you have 6H4S you will appreciate it pd shows his 4 card spade suit.

[Phil]

gwnn, on 2012-March-11, 06:32, said:

If you have 6H4S you will appreciate it pd shows his 4 card spade suit.

Many good Flannery structures roll 4-6 into the opening.

[32519]

Flem72, on 2012-March-10, 20:16, said:

Playing Flan. After 1H-(2m)-?, is there virtue in agreeing that the negative double shows 5S, limited? it would seem to be implied as a corollary to Flan, but I wonder -- any experience out there?

Where or how does Kaplan Inversion fit in here?