fromageGB

This IS fast arrival. It says we want to play in 4S, as far as I am concerned that is the limit of the hand, and I have nothing else useful to say. This is exactly the same meaning as the jump to 3NT. It is the limit of the hand as far as the bidder is concerned, and he has nothing else useful to say. If there were other potential ending places he bids 2NT to see what opener wants to do. I'm with the hog.

I would assume opener has (an)other bid(s) available for strong hands, so I guess 3♠ is simply invitational if I am good for my 1♠. I am not. Pass.

Easy pass. We are told this is "vanilla". This has to be fast arrival, so something like balanced 13-15 and no stronger. Anything better or shapely would bid something else over 2♦.

If you have an Ekren 2♦ (=both majors 4+4+) or something similar, then certainly. If not, then certainly not !

Thanks, aguahombre. Not dependent on the clubs, but on the total hand being slam suitable.

Um, are you playing all weak openers start 1♣ so 1♦ = 16+ unlimited? If partner had this hand, I would expect an apology afterwards ! 3♥ not forcing. If i wanted to force I would bid 2♠ (unspecified but strong) and then 3♥ over say 3♦.

Is the other half 4♦ = 6 not so good clubs with 4 hearts?

Looks to me like a square representation of a table with compass lines.

I thought it meant an attack by terrorists with long black beards.

Certainly not uncommon. I play Berganesque after a major, and major suit WJS after a minor, and like the idea. You can do it whatever style of minor bids you use : I play transfer walsh and shortage/long diamond, but it works just as well with "natural" minors. You just have to make sure they fit in with the whole system so you don't miss out on being able to handle other hand types.

This was many years ago. I think I bought the book in 1993, and looked forward to the sequel, but it never happened. Is the partnership dead and buried now? I agree with an earlier comment that while fit jumps are useful in competition (I play them in my methods) they are - as it theoretically seems to me, not having tried - much less useful without.

Pass on the first. I have the worst spade holding imaginable, and my one asset in clubs is no more than partner expects. Double on the second. Having passed, 4♥ is easy. A useful hand.

I find it's better to play inverted modified reverse odd-even McKenney if you are not vulnerable.

You learn something every day. I looked up Bailey and thought it was Michaels. Then I looked up Michaels to discover I had been misplaying it for years :)

I think you meant your preference is to gear the system to game/slam bidding rather than part-score, and I inferred you thought Bergen was better for the former. I play much more matchpoint than IMPs, so I lean to the partscore/game, and find Bergen is good for that.

Thanks. But we are comparing WJOs with Bergen raises, which are (as I understand) only after major opens, and comparing different uses of the 3m bids.

Agree with Frances, it is too simple to warrant the analysis Fluffy gives it. If 3♥ is invitational, 3♠ is not. I would accept an invitation, but I am not stronger than that.

Brilliant, Frances ! I think the answer is that one needs both in one's cellar.

Nice! So 1♠ 3♦ something 4♦ is "staying low on misfitting hands". I like my low to be a little lower.

I think the OP question has been answered, but don't forget, Bergen type raises are in themselves just as pre-emptive as WJOs. As they occur far more often, that is a big plus. Moreover, it must be remembered that Bergen type raises are not just for reaching the right slam or game, they are very useful in enabling the correct action when 4th seat does enter the bidding. As partner has described both his length and his pretty exact strength, opener is well placed to make a penalty X, or knows it is correct to pass or to compete in the expectation of going off one as a sacrifice, or in the expectation of making. The Bergen raise has given him better judgement. Contrary to blackshoe's opinion, I think it is a great asset in the partscore battle.

Zel's idea seems good, but has one thing I am unfamiliar/unhappy with : the inability to directly show a WJO in a major. Many times partner is able to up the ante of a natural major WJO to the 3 level. Do you actually play this sort of "multi-2D" major WJO? How does it work out in practice?

Well, I never knew I played Questem! This is an interesting idea. You can keep it symmetrical by using the cue, the next suit (cheapest WJO), and 2NT in a sort of just-2-suited-suction, so that cue = next 2 up next suit = next 2 up 2NT = the remaining 2 suits, ie the 2 surrounding the opener This always puts opener on lead, and you can use it with a strong option if you wish. But I don't like the thought of giving up a major WJO.

I must admit I do alert 1♠ as "usually 0-4 spades", but maybe I should be more precise and say "anything but 5 spades"!

No, this doesn't work. If you use 3♣ to be 7-10 constructive raise with 4 card support, 3♦ by opener is invitational. You lose that if you bid 3M. Also if you currently play 2NT as GF, the follow-ons are different to a merely invitational 2NT so you lose those as well. So that's 3 losses.

If any of my opponents took 9 hours 25 minutes to make the first response, I might call the director! :D