[hawki]

The answer to the question for many will be Bergen raises but what else is there?

Splinter, mini - splinter, mixed raise, strong or weak come to mind. All are relatively low frequency and some produce ugly results.

Looking forward to the wisdom of the community.

[sfi]

Recently I've been playing these as natural and invitational, with 6+ cards in the suit and denying 3-card support for opener's major. This works well in a 2/1 system, because otherwise these hands get shoved into the NT response.

This wouldn't make much sense playing something where a two-level response shows 10+ or similar, so it does depend on the rest of your system. And you still need invitational ways to raise partner's major. Since we don't play under ACBL regulations, we can include those in a 2C response. Others define 1M - 2N as invitational or better, which is another way to approach it.

[blackshoe]

Hardy raises. 3♣ is a "good limit raise", either 3 trumps and a singleton, or 4 trumps and no singleton. 3♦ over 1♥, the "under jump shift" is a "game forcing limit raise", aka a minimum splinter, 4 trumps, a side singleton or void somewhere, and a good nine to a bad twelve HCP. 3♦ over 1♠ does not exist.

[nige1]

hawki, on 2017-October-22, 18:12, said:

The answer to the question for many will be Bergen raises but what else is there?Splinter, mini - splinter, mixed raise, strong or weak come to mind. All are relatively low frequency and some produce ugly results.Looking forward to the wisdom of the community.

Previous threads address this topic e.g. this
My suggestion was:

A possible 4-card raise response structure after 1♥ - ??

• 2♠ = BAL or m SPL. Then 2N = ASK: 3♣/♦ = That singleton. 3♥+ = BAL.
• 2N = SPL Short ♠s. Then 3♣ = ASK: 3♦ = ♠ singleton. 3♥+ = ♠ void.
• 3♣/3♦ = SPL. That void.
• 3♥ = PRE.

Similarly, after 1♠ - ??

• 2N = BAL or red SPL. Then 3♣ = ASK: 3♦/♥ = That singleton. 3♠+ = BAL.
• 3♣ = SPL. Short ♣s. Then 3♦ = ASK: 3♥ = ♣ singleton. 3♠+ = ♣ void.
• 3♦/♥ = SPL. That void.
• 3♠ = PRE.

The intent is to show a 4-card raise, a shortage, and the nature of the shortage (with minimal leakage when opener does not want to know), at an economical level, in a simple constent way.

If you don't like forcing 1N (or you are playing 4-card major openings) then consider the following kind of response structure:

1♥ - ??

• 1♠ = NAT.
• 1N = NAT. NF.
• 2♣ = REL. Then 2♦ = ART. Sound. Others = NAT. Weak.
• 2♦ = TRF. 8+ HCP. Sound 3-card raise to at least 2♥.
• 2♥ = NAT. 0-7 HCP.

Similarly over 1♠

• 1N = NAT. NF.
• 2♣ = REL. Then 2♦ = ART. Sound. Others = NAT. Weak.
• 2♦ = TRF. 5+♥s.
• 2♥ = TRF. 8+ HCP. Sound 3-card raise to at least 2♠.
• 2♠ = NAT. 0-7 HCP.

[TylerE]

Anything but WJS, but I'm no particular fan of (vanilla-ish) Bergen either.

[NickRW]

sfi, on 2017-October-22, 18:24, said:

Recently I've been playing these as natural and invitational, with 6+ cards in the suit and denying 3-card support for opener's major. This works well in a 2/1 system, because otherwise these hands get shoved into the NT response.

This wouldn't make much sense playing something where a two-level response shows 10+ or similar...

Why? I've played IJS in a system where 2/1 was F2NT but not GF just fine. The sequence 1M-2m-something-3m then becomes GF.

[sfi]

NickRW, on 2017-October-23, 04:42, said:

Why? I've played IJS in a system where 2/1 was F2NT but not GF just fine. The sequence 1M-2m-something-3m then becomes GF.

Fair enough. TBH I didn't think much about how I could make it work - I just thought that the sequence you give is typically non-forcing.

[Kungsgeten]

NickRW, on 2017-October-23, 04:42, said:

Why? I've played IJS in a system where 2/1 was F2NT but not GF just fine. The sequence 1M-2m-something-3m then becomes GF.

When can you stop in 2NT? 1H-2D; 2NT-pass?

[NickRW]

Kungsgeten, on 2017-October-24, 01:51, said:

When can you stop in 2NT? 1H-2D; 2NT-pass?

Not that sequence in the version I played. The 2NT rebid was a good 17+ and GF obviously. 1H-2D;2H-2N would have worked.