[Phil]

 PhantomSac, on 2016-March-02, 12:47, said:

Yes you should open it with 4-6 almost always (exception would be really good hearts where you don't mind missing a 4-4 spade fit). KI is even less common here, mickyb made some posts about KI+flannery being the nuts, but I think that KI solves a main issue that flannery solves, it seems to me like playing KI + weak 2D or w/e is a lot better than playing KI+flannery or flannery + no KI.

1. We do it with 4-6 and even 5-6.

2. Recent convert to KI. There's a lot of little wins since you get the best of a forcing and NF NT.

[fromageGB]

 Cyberyeti, on 2016-March-02, 16:13, said:

You can easily stick another strong option into 2♦ as well, either a balanced range or strong 4441 or GF clubs for example.

I'm playing 2♦ as either weak both majors (Ekrens style) or 21+ 3-suiter, and it fits together and works well. Obviously when playing a strong option you do not want to be passed out in 2♦, which rules out some of the other weak options!

[Cyberyeti]

 fromageGB, on 2016-March-03, 05:22, said:

I'm playing 2♦ as either weak both majors (Ekrens style) or 21+ 3-suiter, and it fits together and works well. Obviously when playing a strong option you do not want to be passed out in 2♦, which rules out some of the other weak options!

Yeah, I was thinking multi style, but you could make the weak 2 hearts only then play 2♥ Ekren which I think is better for the Ekren, worse for the hearts.

[Zelandakh]

Around here 2♦ as weak with hearts or strong is called Bamberger Multi and played fairly widely. The 2♦ mini-multi + 2♥ majors + 2♠ Muiderberg option is one that Chris Ryall helped to popularise in the earlier days of his website.

[wank]

 PhantomSac, on 2016-March-02, 12:47, said:

it seems to me like playing KI + weak 2D or w/e is a lot better than playing KI+flannery or flannery + no KI.

interestingly, despite people saying the main benefit of flannery is the effect on your 1H opening sequences, i saw a stat, a pavlicek thing i think, saying that the flannery 2D opener was averaging +2 imps in itself, the same as a weak 2D. i'm guessing a weak 2D is more frequent though, albeit not hugely, assuming one plays a more disciplined style.

edit: found the study. i remembered the stats wrong. it's +1 imp per board, but that's slightly better than a weak 2D. weak 2D does significantly better at MP though fwiw. also fwiw in his sample events a weak 2 made 616 appearances versus 328 for flannery (this is pretty meaningless without knowing how many pairs play each convention but i suspect more play a weak 2D so they're roughly equally common).

flannery v not link: http://www.rpbridge.net/9x25.htm
weak 2D v not link: http://www.rpbridge.net/9x27.htm

[Caitlynne]

This is an invalid question. It always depends on system and the partnership's principal strategic objectives for the auction.

Many openings - particularly the openings of 2C and 2D - are designed specifically to provide coverage for a set of problem or "gap" hands for the system.

My answer would be quite different playing SAYC than playing Precision, for example. In SAYC, Flannery would be quite useful but it is less useful when playing 2/1 or Precision, especially if you play the Kaplan 1S/1NT Inversion or some device like Gazzilli.

Likewise, if my partnership prefers a strategy of creating action and confusion, I might want to play Multicolored 2D and Muiderberg-like 2H and 2S bids regardless of system.

So your question is insufficiently limited to really have a valid or definitive answer.

[nekthen]

I like multi 2♦ 3 way weak major or strong minor or balanced. it leaves room for 2♥ and 2♠ to be other weak hands. I use them both for Muideberg a 5 card major plus a 4/5 card minor weak.
I am ok passing a weak hand with both majors because most of the time I get to bid later.
from a memory / consistency pov it fits with Multi landy which I also use

[nullve]

 Caitlynne, on 2016-March-03, 09:10, said:

In SAYC, Flannery would be quite useful but it is less useful when playing 2/1 or Precision

It's the other way around, isn't it? I mean, if

1♥-1N = 6-10 hcp, 3-S2-H,

then Opener can just pass with 11-15 hcp and either 4522 or 45(31).

[lorserker]

usually when i talk about system, i am happy if we can quickly agree that 2SHD are weak, so we can move on and talk about some other parts of the system.

maybe playing 2D as stronger than 2C is also good, but then there is a lot to talk about responses, so i usually don't suggest this. is this strong 2d still used by many people?

in natural, i think weak both majors is nice.

in precision, a loose three-suiter which can contain 5431 and is short in diamonds is nice.

[Zelandakh]

 lorserker, on 2016-March-03, 13:45, said:

maybe playing 2D as stronger than 2C is also good, but then there is a lot to talk about responses, so i usually don't suggest this. is this strong 2d still used by many people?

It is very common at club level in France, Germany and parts of the UK - less common in most other places.

[gwnn]

Ken Rexford proposed 2♣=strong, 0-3 spades. 2♦=strong, 4+ spades. I don't know exactly how it makes sense but as far as I remember, it makes everything quite elegant in your structures.

[PrecisionL]

Playing Precision: 2♦ = 10-14 hcp and 5+ ♦ without a 4-cd major. May have 4♣ also.

Playing 2/1: 2♦ = (a) Any 4441 hand with 17+ hcp, or (b) Balanced with 5+♦ & 20-21 hcp, or © 1 or 2 suited with ♦s primary.

Response is always 2♥ asking:

2♠ = Any 4441 hand

2NT = 20-21 hcp balanced with 5+♦

3♣ = 4+♣ and 5+♦, 1 round force

3♦ = 6+♦, unbalanced

3♥ = 4♥ and 5+♦

3♠ = 4♠ and 5+♦

3NT = 5+♦, balanced and 24-25 Hap

[daffydoc]

I use 2D to show the 17-24 4441 - traditionally a very hard hand to bid. One year at the nationals came up 5 times in 10 days, Last year once. Effective tool when it comes up. daffydoc

[Siegmund]

Delighted to come to this thread and see Wilkosz mentioned several times already.

I always felt it was easier to defend against than Multi was -- 10 cards in 2 suits is a lot more specific than 6 cards in 1 suit is. Was struck by the irony of Europe being too scared to play a convention the Polish LOLs managed, just like North America is scare to play a convention the English LOLs manage.

In particular, Wilkosz+Natural 2H/2S beats the pants off of Multi+Muiderberg style 2Ms.

[msjennifer]

For me playing with a partner playing any standard e.g.Sayc,Acol or std American I play 2D as Flannery.It is no use playing multi against strong opponents as they know how to deal with it. Same for playing it as weak in diamonds.When playing strong club or precision I use it to show sub-one club opener short in diamonds and lacking a five card major.Playing blue club I use 2D as three suited with no five card major and 17 to 23 HCP. it all depends upon who my partner is.

[Vampyr]

 msjennifer, on 2016-March-04, 00:34, said:

It is no use playing multi against strong opponents as they know how to deal with it. Same for playing it as weak in diamonds.

Relying on opponents' unfamiliarity with a treatment is not the way most people prefer to play.

[gordontd]

 PhantomSac, on 2016-March-02, 12:43, said:

Yeah for sure 2H weak with the majors is better than 2D, but I wouldn't want to have to play multi. Seems like having a bid for the majors is the nuts in general though.

I like the idea of 2D showing diamonds and a major, weak, at least 4-4. I've only had one partner who I played it with though, and the best result we had was when he psyched it against a couple of former world champions on a 3433 hand, which I raised with a 3136.

[nullve]

 Vampyr, on 2016-March-04, 03:10, said:

Relying on opponents' unfamiliarity with a treatment is not the way most people prefer to play.

Unless they play stupid games like chess.

[Vampyr]

 nullve, on 2016-March-04, 05:42, said:

Unless they play stupid games like chess.

Chess is a very dissimilar game to bridge, but I wouldn't call it stupid. You may not like it, but lots of people find it fascinating.

[aguahombre]

 Vampyr, on 2016-March-04, 03:10, said:

Relying on opponents' unfamiliarity with a treatment is not the way most people prefer to play.

I wonder.