Defensive conventions

There are a few competitive/defensive treatments that need to be documented.

Flannery is an opening 2D bid that shows five hearts and four spades and 11-15hcp. The idea is that such hands pose the most difficulty for systems that use 5-card major openings with the 1NT response forcing, because they are not strong enough for opener to reverse, and so over 1NT he may be forced to rebid 2C on a doubleton – hardly descriptive. If such hands are separated out of the 1H opening, they can be bid conveniently, while the forcing no-trump complex becomes cleaner. (While this is true, the cost – using up the 2D opening – really doesn’t appear worth the benefit, to most experts).

There are variations: some play that the Flannery bid includes 4-6 hands. It is also possible to play Flannery as a non-forcing 2H opening, rather than a forcing 2D opening. Neither variation poses any additional problems for the defence.

While we don’t meet Flannery very often, we should have a defensive approach defined. As per Elwood, over 2D we play
• Double – shows diamonds, equivalent to a 2D overcall of a 1H opening
• 2H – take-out of hearts, showing support for the other three suits (including spades), equivalent to a double of a 1H opening
• 2S – both minors, equivalent to 2NT against a 1H opening
• 2NT – natural, equivalent to 1NT over a 1H opening, but a bit stronger, say 17-19hcp
This is straightforward, really, although the only time (so far) it has come up playing with Elwood, I forgot. That’s the main reason for getting it down in writing.

Unusual over Unusual is a more commonly-occurring treatment.

Over a one-level opening, a 2NT overcall is the Unusual No Trump, showing the two lowest unbid suits, at least 5-5. Since opener has bid one suit and the opponents have shown two, responder only really has three active courses of action: to attempt to penalize the opponents, to support opener, or to show the fourth suit. The intent to penalize the opponents can be demonstrated by doubling the 2NT bid. This should indicate a willingness to make a penalty double of at least one of overcaller’s suits, and implies not too much fit with opener’s suit.

When it comes to bidding our suit(s), there is a problem in that it would be nice to have both a merely competitive raise and an invitational raise, but we have been crowded to the three-level. However, by way of compensation, we have two cue-bids available. In the ordinary overcall situation, an immediate raise to the three-level is pre-emptive, and a cue-bid of the overcall is limit+. For example, 1H – (2C) – 3H is pre-emptive, and 1H – (2C) – 3C is a limit raise of hearts (or better). In the Unusual situation, the lower cue-bid shows the lower of our suits, and the higher cue-bid shows the higher suit, while direct bids are merely competing. Examples:
1H – (2NT) – 3C is a limit raise or better of hearts
1H – (2NT) – 3H is pre-emptive
1H – (2NT) – 3S is not forcing
1H – (2NT) – 3D shows spades and a tolerance for hearts, invitational-plus strength.
1D – (2NT) – 3C is a limit raise or better of diamonds
1D – (2NT) – 3H shows spades and a tolerance for diamonds, invitational-plus strength.

This treatment can be extended to use against any overcall method that specifies both suits. For example, Michaels over a minor suit opening to show both majors:
1C – (2C) – 2H is a limit raise or better of clubs
1C – (2C) – 2S shows diamonds and a tolerance for clubs, invitational-plus strength
1C – (2C) – 2D, 1C – (2C) – 3C, and 1C – (2C) – 3D are all just competing.
When only one suit is exactly specified, it doesn’t apply. For example, Michaels over a major:
1H – (2H) – 2S is a limit-plus raise of hearts, but there is no second cue-bid available because overcaller’s minor suit is not known.