[jerdonald]

BBO forum,

I have played Bergen Raises in the past but my current partner won't
play it. I know there is some conflict among bridge players as to
whether it is a useful convention or not. I would like some of your
opinions.

Jerry D

[Vampyr]

jerdonald, on 2015-April-07, 18:44, said:

BBO forum,

I have played Bergen Raises in the past but my current partner won't
play it. I know there is some conflict among bridge players as to
whether it is a useful convention or not. I would like some of your
opinions.

Jerry D

IMO the advantage of Bergen raises is that you free up 1M-3M for weak hands. Do you have another way to show invitational hands with a fit? 2♣ maybe?

[aguahombre]

When 1M-2M is inviting game, Opener either accepts game or he doesn't.

The advantage of Bergen 3m over 1M is that there are 3 choices for opener; accept, decline, and slowly decline.

[kenberg]

My usual approach for Bergen, for Drury, for artificial bids in general is that if either partner is uncomfortable with the convention then forget it. Very few conventions are essential. But maybe he would be open to a very precisely defined set of Bergen bids. Part of my trouble with Bergen is that it means different things to different people. So maybe:

On only after partner opens in first or second position
Off if the bidding starts 1M-X or 1M-overcall.
The Bergen bids are 1M-3M, 1M-3m.
1M-3M is limited to a six count and is always on 4+trump, rarely with a stiff (1M-4M with a stiff)
1M-3C is the limit raise + (called reverse Bergen I guess, but Bergen reversed it himself)
1M-3D is the modest hand

Or modify this to suit you, but make it specific.

I have often seen pick-ups get in trouble after "Play Bergen" "Ok" Maybe he has had such experiences and so avoids them. But if you are going to decelop agreements, then it should be ok.

Presumably 1M-3m now means something already, and you would have to give that up. Maybe he doesn't want to give it up.For example, playing 2/1 some play that 1M-3m says: If we were not playing 2/1 I would first bid 2m and then rebid a passable 3m. Since we are playing 2/1, I just bid 3m immediately. Obviously that would have to go.


Bergen had a number of other Bergen Raises in his book but most people, when they speak of Bergen Raises, don't include these other items.


Bergen raises are of value but not essential.Watch high level play on vugraph. Some play them, some don't. I would say if he really doesn't want to play them, don't play them and relax about it.

acqua posted while I was writing and I agree. It's why 1M-3C should (well, my preference) be the LR, especially if M=H. Opener can say yes with 4M, or no with 3M, or say maybe with 3D..

[Vampyr]

kenberg, on 2015-April-07, 20:52, said:

acqua posted while I was writing and I agree. It's why 1M-3C should (well, my preference) be the LR, especially if M=H. Opener can say yes with 4M, or no with 3M, or say maybe with 3D..

LOL I am pretty sure that's not why he meant by slowly decline...

[aguahombre]

kenberg, on 2015-April-07, 20:52, said:

acqua posted while I was writing and I agree. It's why 1M-3C should (well, my preference) be the LR, especially if M=H. Opener can say yes with 4M, or no with 3M, or say maybe with 3D..

That's a different advantage

[jerdonald]

BBO forum,

Thanks for the replies.

I like 1M P 3C to show a LR but one of the reasons my partner
doesn't want to play BR is because he has been burned too many
times by the sequence 1M P 3M P. Bergen says to make the weak
3M bid with 2-6 points. I know it satisfies "THE LAW" but with
2-4 points the OPS can often take 5 of the side trick.

Jerry D.

[akwoo]

jerdonald, on 2015-April-07, 23:09, said:

BBO forum,

Thanks for the replies.

I like 1M P 3C to show a LR but one of the reasons my partner
doesn't want to play BR is because he has been burned too many
times by the sequence 1M P 3M P. Bergen says to make the weak
3M bid with 2-6 points. I know it satisfies "THE LAW" but with
2-4 points the OPS can often take 5 of the side trick.

Jerry D.

This is a complete non-issue.

If you are playing against decent opponents, they will almost NEVER let you play in 2M (or 1M) on a 9 card fit.

If they can set 3M by 1, they can almost always make 3 of their suit.

-100 is better than -110 (or -130 or -140). Once in a while, the 3M raise will actually keep opponents out of a making game.

If you are playing in a weak field, then you shouldn't really be playing to win but rather to practice for stronger fields.

This being said, I've found that the best argument for playing Bergen is to give partner an easy way to pre-empt on hands where he or she would be tempted to find other, worse ways to pre-empt or otherwise be tempted to back into the auction later. If your partner thinks about psyching a 2♥ response to 1♠ with ♠Qxxx ♥x ♦xxx ♣xxxxx and 4th seat fingering the X card, it's definitely time to put in Bergen.

If you are a conservative partnership that is happy to take the average minus for -110, then you're probably just as happy not playing Bergen.

[helene_t]

You don't have to jump to 3M if you don't like it If your suit is spades and you are vulnerable and partner opens in second seat and you have no ruffing value just bid 2S. But of course if you rarely use it you may as well abandon the convention.

In the Netherlands it is standard to play 3M as preemptive and 2NT as 10+ . So with 7-8 and thereabouts you have to make a single raise.

What does partner want to use 3c and 3d for? In my opinion there are other uses for those bids that are better than bergen. In a 2/1 system it is nice to have a way to show an invitational hand with a long minor.

Anyway, kenberg nailed it . If partner don't like them don't play them.

[NickRW]

I have a simple rule for all but the most established of partnerships. "Your card partner". Not because I am some memory machine that can effortlessly know/remember everything that they do and do not want, but, never the less, a) I am better at it than most people I come across and b) comfort and familiarity are important.

Established partnerships are a different kettle of fish.

[NickRW]

helene_t, on 2015-April-08, 01:02, said:

What does partner want to use 3c and 3d for? In my opinion there are other uses for those bids that are better than bergen. In a 2/1 system it is nice to have a way to show an invitational hand with a long minor.

Intermediate jump shifts work well if you're not playing 2/1 as well. 1x - 2m - 2x or y - 3m then becomes a GF.

Quote

Anyway, kenberg nailed it . If partner don't like them don't play them.

Yay!

[BillHiggin]

jerdonald, on 2015-April-07, 23:09, said:

BBO forum,

Thanks for the replies.

I like 1M P 3C to show a LR but one of the reasons my partner
doesn't want to play BR is because he has been burned too many
times by the sequence 1M P 3M P. Bergen says to make the weak
3M bid with 2-6 points. I know it satisfies "THE LAW" but with
2-4 points the OPS can often take 5 of the side trick.

Jerry D.

This may or may not be totally relevant, but I have observed a very prevalent problem with the way many intermediate (give or take a bit) player use Bergen raises (and other "LAW" based bids such as super accepts). They tend to worship the word "all" and fail to downgrade shapeless hands (i.e. 4333 hands in particular). If you decide that no hands with 4333 shape qualify as "four card support", you will see most of the too many off hands simply disappear.

However, I strongly agree with Ken Berg - no convention is so valuable that a partnership will do better with it when at least one partner is not comfortable with it!

[neilkaz]

helene_t, on 2015-April-08, 01:02, said:

You don't have to jump to 3M if you don't like it If your suit is spades and you are vulnerable and partner opens in second seat and you have no ruffing value just bid 2S. But of course if you rarely use it you may as well abandon the convention.

In the Netherlands it is standard to play 3M as preemptive and 2NT as 10+ . So with 7-8 and thereabouts you have to make a single raise.

What does partner want to use 3c and 3d for? In my opinion there are other uses for those bids that are better than bergen. In a 2/1 system it is nice to have a way to show an invitational hand with a long minor.

Anyway, kenberg nailed it . If partner don't like them don't play them.

Netherlands standard is what I prefer. I think it is usual to call that Jacoby 2NT+ here in the states.

[P_Marlowe]

jerdonald, on 2015-April-07, 23:09, said:

BBO forum,

Thanks for the replies.

I like 1M P 3C to show a LR but one of the reasons my partner
doesn't want to play BR is because he has been burned too many
times by the sequence 1M P 3M P. Bergen says to make the weak
3M bid with 2-6 points. I know it satisfies "THE LAW" but with
2-4 points the OPS can often take 5 of the side trick.

Jerry D.

The theory behind bergen is, that they dont let us play 2M, and if
they make a partial on the 2/3 Level this is more than -1.
This theory is ok, but needs some adjustments.

If you are red, -100/-200 beats most often, what they can make, hence
being red, you should be in the upper range of the allowed range, with
2-4 and 4 cards simply bid 2M. You still have the chance to bid 3M,
to follow the LAW, if they have a fit, and positive adjustments favor
bidding 3M.

The theory is also sensible, if we talk about hearts, if we talk about
spades, it gets a bit problematic, they have to go to the 3 level, they
may do it, but may be reluctant, if they are red, hence holding spades
would also favor to be a bit more conservative with the preemptive raise.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: I dont play Bergen, but there are no super agreements, what jump shifts
to the 3 level should mean, hence Bergen is ok.

[fromageGB]

I used to play Bergen for years with different partners, but (in all bar one partnership) have given them up. I think they fall down on 2 counts :
- 1M 3M is a bad bid when the opponents had no intention of bidding to the 3-level anyway. It may be said that decent opponents will not let you get away with playing 2M, but not all opponents are decent. In matchpoints, a Bergen-bottom is not unusual.
- 1M 3m can be put to a better use, such as invitational, or as mini-splinters, or other bids showing major support.

The 3M pre-empt is not as effective, it can be argued, as having a 2M raise being a normal sort of 7-10 3 card support, or weaker (say 4-8) 4 card support. It does not affect things when opponents are quiet, as both are suitable for handling a game invitation from opener. If opponents are not inclined to be quiet, then the advantage now is that they do NOT know you have 4 card support, so may not bid in the first place. If they do, you are happy taking a push to 3M.

A 3m response, if not wanted as natural, could be usefully used as support by having 3M-2 as a no-shortage game invitation (4 card support) and 3M-1 as natural (or other major) mini-splinter, say 9/10 count with 11/12 being a normal splinter - or whatever your two ranges would be - and 3M-3 as a mini-splinter in one of the other two suits. If opener is possibly interested in game, he can bid the next step to find out which, and you can stop in 3M if it is the wrong shortage.

[mycroft]

I've played Bergen, I don't now. I like 3M (yes, if you're robotic about it, you'll get a lot of matchpoint zeros (but you'll get a lot of matchpoint tops, especially when you go down 100, even if you are robotic about it)), but I don't like the 3m bids. In my current partnerships we have better uses for them (and no, weak jump responses are not better - in fact, not being able to make a WJS to 3m is a *great* reason to play Bergen!) and I don't trust Bergen raises in a non-regular partnership, because you *will* eventually be on the wrong side of the "which minor shows the limit raise?" debate. But I don't mind them; they really do put the pressure on (even if the chicken option will be better in the long run for the opponents, for some reason they *can't* keep quiet).

I don't like 1M-2M guaranteeing exactly 3; too easy for the opponents to LOTT their way into the action.

I guess I'm arguing myself into a European-style 1M-2NT LR+ structure; but ATM it's too differently artificial (from old-fashioned J2N that everybody here plays) for my current partners.

[blackshoe]

mycroft, on 2015-April-15, 15:54, said:

I guess I'm arguing myself into a European-style 1M-2NT LR+ structure; but ATM it's too differently artificial (from old-fashioned J2N that everybody here plays) for my current partners.

There's Hardy raises.

Romex has its own raise structure, based mostly on LTC and cover cards. 2NT is called the "Extended Maxi Raise". Three different hand types, including a (four card iirc) limit raise. Subsequent bidding will sort it out.