[gurgistan]

I play 2/1 without Bergen raises but many 2/1 users employ Bergen. To my uneducated eye 2/1 appears to be system with great precision and subtlety.

Bergen raises just seem to add a whole load of extras to remember and of course as with any conventional responses: If you are gaining something then you are losing something as well. The gain is usually greater than the loss for a convention to become well accepted.

Can someone explain simply just what Bergen users are getting for their use of the system?

Much obliged.

[gwnn]

with about 13 points and a singleton, you can bid game over a bergen raise, but you will usually have to pass 2M.

[aguahombre]

They are gaining 3 or four different ways of showing 4-card support. Whether the expense is too great, or whether they are overburdening other calls for that gain is debatable.

[blackshoe]

Someone, Ron Andersen, I think, once complained "there aren't enough ways to raise partner". Bergen Raises were a first step towards alleviating that concern. Differentiating between 3 and 4 trumps is useful, since a nine card fit is much better than an eight card fit. With Bergen Raises, you can show a 3 card simple raise (bid 2M), a four card constructive raise (bid 3♣), a three card limit raise (bid 1NT (Forcing), then jump to 3M), a four card limit raise (bid 3♦), or a 4 card preemptive raise (bid 3M). There's more to Bergen Raises: you can show a splinter in some suit (bid 3 of the other major, next step asks where the shortage is), a flat hand with four trump (bid 3NT), a weak hand with 5 trump and a side ace or king (bid 4♣, iirc). 4♦ also has an assigned meaning, but I've forgotten it for the moment. That's about ten different hand types with support for partner's major. Oh, and I left out Jacoby 2NT, which shows a balanced (probably) raise with slam interest. (Many play Jacoby 2NT to show 12+ HCP, where Bergen suggests 15+).

What do you lose? Jump shifts into the minors. Not very useful. Natural 1NT, 2NT, and 3NT responses, again not all that useful. You gain quite a lot.

[mgoetze]

blackshoe, on Aug 22 2010, 10:05 PM, said:

What do you lose? Jump shifts into the minors. Not very useful. Natural 1NT, 2NT, and 3NT responses, again not all that useful. You gain quite a lot.

OK, if my only alternative to Bergen raises is to play strong jump shifts, fine, I'll play Bergen raises.

Here in Europe, we are allowed to play such exotic conventions as weak jump shifts, fit jumps, jumps showing invitational strength with a good long suit, minisplinters, etc. - accordingly, the case for Bergen raises is not as clear.

[bluecalm]

I prefer simple natural structure where jumps to 3m or 3♥ after 1♠ are natural and invitational. It makes forcing 1NT easier to untangle. I would say losing those is pretty big loss.

[cloa513]

You also gain a target for opponents to lead direct.

[blackshoe]

mgoetze, on Aug 22 2010, 05:22 PM, said:

blackshoe, on Aug 22 2010, 10:05 PM, said:

What do you lose? Jump shifts into the minors. Not very useful. Natural 1NT, 2NT, and 3NT responses, again not all that useful. You gain quite a lot.

OK, if my only alternative to Bergen raises is to play strong jump shifts, fine, I'll play Bergen raises.

Here in Europe, we are allowed to play such exotic conventions as weak jump shifts, fit jumps, jumps showing invitational strength with a good long suit, minisplinters, etc. - accordingly, the case for Bergen raises is not as clear.

I didn't say "strong jump shifts", I said "jump shifts". I agree that weak jump shifts are generally more useful than strong jump shifts, but I think using the jump shifts as raises of the major is better still. Minisplinters tend to give too much away to the defenders. Fit jumps are useful, but natural fit jumps use two or three bids to show the same type of hand, which reduces the available space to show other types.

All IMO, YMMV, etc.

[nigel_k]

I'm not a huge fan of Bergen but agree it is better than strong jump shifts.

I like minisplinters. Knowing responder's shortage is often the key to bidding thin games. There is enough space to show four card support with or without a shortage and still have space for another step to differentiate good and bad invites. Plus you can show a shortage then bid on with a hand too strong for a traditional splinter, which I prefer to bidding Jacoby 2NT on those hands.

For example:

1♠-2NT: Club or diamond mini-splinter
1♠-3♣: Replaces Jacoby 2NT
1♠-3♦: Heart mini-splinter
1♠-3♥: Four card limit raise
1♠-3♠: Preempt

After 1♠-2NT, opener bids 3♣ if interested and responder then bids 3♦ with diamond shortage, 3♥ max with club shortage and 3♠ min with club shortage. Over a 1♥ opening you can do the same one level lower.

I'm not a law fanatic so see no need to go to the three level immediately with 7-9 and no shortage.

[fromageGB]

I use the direct raises and the 3♣/♦ bids as I find it extremely useful to know with some precision what partner has :
It helps greatly in competitive situations, enabling better decisions on whether to bid higher, pass, or double.
It helps in unopposed auctions in deciding whether game is on.

The downsides I find are :
sometimes bidding 3M when you don't need to (3M-1 when 2M makes) - but you can modify it when both opps have already passed and are probably less likely to come in;
losing the ability to bid 3m in sufficient ways - I treat 1NT then a minor as weak, to play, and hide the minor with invitational hands. (I tried 2/1 then repeating the minor as not GF, but gave that up.)

All together, I think it has more benefits than losses.

[fromageGB]

blackshoe, on Aug 22 2010, 10:05 PM, said:

With Bergen Raises, you can show a 3 card simple raise (bid 2M), ... a three card limit raise (bid 1NT (Forcing), then jump to 3M)...

Don't forget the 3 card "less than simple" raise of 1NT then 2M. I find this helps too.

[peachy]

You gain the knowledge of exactly how many trumps partner has for support when the bidding starts 1M-2M. 2M never has more than three card support and then you can agree whether you want to split the 2M raises into weak (go via 1NT) and constructive. I don't like that but it is playable, and many do. I think this is the best gain.

Also gain knowledge of exactly four-card support for 3C and 3D bids. (7-9 and Limit)
Also gain 1M-3M as a preempt.

The gains come with the loss of 3C and 3D bids, and the loss in giving opponents opportunity to leaddirecting double over 3C and/or 3D.

In my experience in US, Bergen is very popular in the "Red Ribbon" crowd while not popular among top experts or world class. For those who are not from ACBL, the "Red Ribbon crowd" means players who are advanced but either have not played a long time or have under 2000 masterpoints.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

#1 The best usage of a jump shift response to the 3 level is still not found,
you have SJS, WJS, Mini Splinter, ..., and you have Bergen.
I liked to play SJS, it worked, but I agree, that a 3D response to a 1H
opening burns a lot of space, and they went out of fashion, so I agreed
to switch.
We started to play WJS, they did not come up very often, and I dont even
buy the need, but we agreed to play.
Now we play IJS, that makes a certain sense, playing this made several
other of our auctions GF.
I only tried to play Minisplinter once, ..., so no idea how they do, but in the
one tournament I played, they never showed up, but this can also be said
about ...
#2 Playing Bergen, you gain some precision with regards to limit raises, sometimes
you have a 2 1/2 limit raise, some times you have a 3 1/2 limit raise.
And sometimes you also have a preemtive raise to 4, but have some add. values,
which may be interesting for p, if he has interest in slam, so you can go via
3C/3D, intending to follow up with 4.
And since 4M is where the money lies, improving the precision of major suit
raises is not a waste, of course you may get the same with only one add.
response.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Gerben42]

There are worse things than Bergen Raises. What's good enough for Fred is good enough for me, I'd say.

System summary Gitelman-Moss

I think they are playing improving 2/1 GF, which means that the cheapest jumpshift is Jacoby, 2NT is natural GF and the other two jumpshifts are Bergen. I kinda like that structure and its inferences.

As someone with much experience in system tinkering, I would say many pairs are trying to get all kinds of new stuff for the jump shifts but where the big gains are really in competitive auctions like Opening (overcall) Bid, or (opening) overcall (pass / raise) etc.

[junyi_zhu]

gurgistan, on Aug 22 2010, 08:25 PM, said:

I play 2/1 without Bergen raises but many 2/1 users employ Bergen. To my uneducated eye 2/1 appears to be system with great precision and subtlety.

Bergen raises just seem to add a whole load of extras to remember and of course as with any conventional responses: If you are gaining something then you are losing something as well. The gain is usually greater than the loss for a convention to become well accepted.

Can someone explain simply just what Bergen users are getting for their use of the system?

Much obliged.

There are quite a few different hand types which you may want to incorporate into your jumpshifts over 1M.
1, constructive or invitational raises that show 4 or more trumps.
2, invitational hands with good 6 or longer suits.
3, invitational hands with 3 cards trumps.
Type 2 and 3 are especially important if you don't play a forcing 1NT over 1M.
You can certainly incorporate most of them into your systems.
after 1H:
2S: gf 4+ trump raise.
2N: invitational raise with 3 or 4+ trumps.
3C asking.
3D: 3 card raise.
3H: 4 card raise. Other bids can show singletons with 4 cards.
3C/D: good suits, invitational.
3H: constructive raise with 4 H.

After 1S:
2N: 4+ trumps raise.
3C: invitational raise with 3 or 4+ trumps.
3D/H: good suits, invitational.
3S: constructive raise with 4 spades.

You have a problem with clubs here, which is always a headache after 1S opening. You can either underbid with 1NT or overbid with 2C though.