bergen or not bergen

[babalu1997]

do people really need bergen raises?

 

i can see the value of premption but not with evry hand given

 

the issue of a bergen raise should be dependent on shap as well so as sometimes one doe not need to preempt.

 

nothing worng wil limit raoses actually

[jjbrr]

no you do not really need bergen raises. on some hands they work though.

 

also, if you include the 4-card limit raises into 2NT, then all you lose is the mixed raise, but you free up 3m to be something useful and can still have the 1M 3M weak raise (or you can make that the mixed raise, if you prefer).

[Phil]

Bergen is OK, but its not my favorite convention but its not something I hate either. If a new pard insists, I never have a problem with it. Many good pairs play it, or modified versions of it.

 

If you don't want to play Bergen, I would suggest:

 

- 1M - 3M as mixed.

 

- Load 4 card limit raises onto your forcing raise structure, which requires some slight modifications, and takes a little practice to get used to.

 

- With 4 card preemptive raises, I think you are better off starting with 1N or just making a simple raise.

 

- 1M - 3x as invitational. AFAIC, there are no other attractive uses for this call.

[rbforster]

Any bid should work well when it comes up. If you use 1M-3m to show major raises, you'll be glad you have that when you hold a major raise. On the other hand, you'll be sad if you hold a semi-solid 6-7 card minor with invitational values (or alternatively a slam invitational hand with a strong minor suit if you play strong jumps).

 

Playing a standard system, I have no real preference either way for Bergen. Playing precision or some other system where 1M is fairly limited (we can't be preempting partner too much if he's got 10-15), I like Bergen raises to preempt the opponents.

[pooltuna]

do people really need bergen raises?

 

i can see the value of premption but not with evry hand given

 

the issue of a bergen raise should be dependent on shap as well so as sometimes one doe not need to preempt.

 

nothing worng wil limit raoses actually

As a caveat I have never used Bergen raises. IMO the argument against them is the amount of information they generate combined with the possible exchange of opponent information by doubling or not doubling the Bergen call. Compared to a more ambiguous forcing or semiforcing 1NT call followed by 2M or 3M which leaves the opponents more in the dark as to whether balancing makes sense.

[ArtK78]

I like Bergen raises, and I play them in a structure of major suit raises that includes Jacoby 2NT and mini, regular and maxi splinters (which I have presented several times and will not reproduce here).

 

Bergen raises are just one tool available as part of a major suit raise structure. One can use the bids used as Bergen raises for some other purpose, but it is my experience that those other purposes are either much less frequent or much less useful than Bergen raises.

[jjbrr]

One thing I personally don't like is the full bergen stuff, with 4♣ showing a great hand with support, 4♦ showing a 4M bid with defense, and 4M showing a 4M bid without defense.

[ArtK78]

One thing I personally don't like is the full bergen stuff, with 4♣ showing a great hand with support, 4♦ showing a 4M bid with defense, and 4M showing a 4M bid without defense.

Never heard of the 4♣ and 4♦ bids before.

[jjbrr]

One thing I personally don't like is the full bergen stuff, with 4♣ showing a great hand with support, 4♦ showing a 4M bid with defense, and 4M showing a 4M bid without defense.

Never heard of the 4♣ and 4♦ bids before.

From http://www.bridgehands.com/B/Bergen_Raise.htm:

 

4C is a "Swiss Raise" when playing ambiguous splinters.  4C describes a hand better than a Bergen 3N response, thus 4C show 16+ points.  This treatment is seldom included by most Bergen Raise players.

 

 

4D describes a hand stronger than jumping to 4H/S (2-5), equivalent similar to a 3C (7-10) Bergen raise with 5 or more trump.  This treatment is seldom included by most Bergen Raise players.

 

Anyway, I don't like them.

[awm]

Put me in the "not bergen" camp.

 

Bergen advantages:

 

(1) Takes away space from the opponents in competitive sequences.

(2) Can help partner judge whether to try/bid game (or slam) opposite single raise values b/c he knows trump length immediately.

 

Bergen disadvantages:

 

(1) Allows double of artificial bid for lead, safer than bidding at 3-level after 1M-2M.

(2) Sometimes pushes to 3M when you could've bought the contract for 2M (especially in ♠)

(3) Can help opponents figure out leads (trump lead and/or forcing defense better vs. 5-3 fit)

(4) Removes space for accurate game tries opposite mixed raise hand.

(5) Eliminates jumps to 3m for other possible uses

 

It seems to me that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages here.

[akhare]

I am not particularly fond of them either, but will tag along if someone insists on playing.

 

The 1M - 3M weak raise hardly ever come up in standard and the bid is better suited as a traditional LR or a mixed raise (the weak raise works much better in a limited opening system though). As others have pointed, jumping leads to more crowded auctions and allows them to make cheap lead directing / sacrifice oriented doubles of the 3m bids...

[fromageGB]

I'm for the Bergen, like it a lot. The 3m bids may allow a lead-indicating double, but that's not something I've noticed. The thing I like about them is that you clearly describe both your length and strength in one go. Good for competitive bidding, and good for game judgement.

 

Downsides :

 

Going off in 3M when others are in 2M - yes, so if both oppos have passed you may be a little circumspect with the 1M - 3M, but it would not deter me from 3m, as partner needs that info to judge game.

 

The mixed raise eg 1♥ 3♣ on 7-10 and 4 card support may leave little room for investigation, but there is room for a 3♦ relay for responder to judge whether good or bad. If you wanted more room, and replied with another bid, that would mean the other bid would be too wide-ranging to be useful.

 

3m would be handy to have for something else (I've toyed with 2/1 followed by repeating the m as non-GF but don't like it) but the number of times you would use it is completely outweighed by the Bergen usage.

 

So - Bergen good outweighs bad.

 

As a sidenote, I have the Bergen 3m raises shifted up when over 1♠, so 3♦ is 7-10 4 card and 3♥ is 11-12 4 card, ie Bergen is 3M-1 and 3M-2, as we have the 3M-3 response for something else.

[kenrexford]

I also like bumping up the 3♦ call to 3♥ after a 1♠ opening, with the addition of 3♦ for an invitational heart hand.

[straube]

I like them, but I don't think that it should be mandatory to go to the 3-level with four trump. I also think 1M-3M ought to show something, especially vulnerable.

 

What I do like about them is that they transfer captaincy to opener in a way that single raises don't accomplish. Now 1M-2M tends to be a hand that won't take the push.

[barmar]

I'm not a fan of them, either. I've only let one partner talk me into them. She's pretty and she pouted when I said I didn't want to play them.

[kfay]

Not Bergen, plzthx

[jdonn]

They are like country music, most people rightfully don't prefer it but they go too far in brutally hating it since it still has merit.

 

LOL at how many people claim to play 'bergen raises' and don't know the whole system including the 4 level bids.

[jillybean]

They are like country music, most people rightfully don't prefer it but they go too far in brutally hating it since it still has merit.

 

LOL at how many people claim to play 'bergen raises' and don't know the whole system including the 4 level bids.

Do you mean 1M:3oM showing unspecified splinter then the 4 level being used to show the shortage, or something else?

[jdonn]

See jjbr posts please.

[jjbrr]

They are like country music, most people rightfully don't prefer it but they go too far in brutally hating it since it still has merit.

 

LOL at how many people claim to play 'bergen raises' and don't know the whole system including the 4 level bids.

Do you mean 1M:3oM showing unspecified splinter then the 4 level being used to show the shortage, or something else?

Yes, I didn't post anything about 1M 3oM showing an unspecified splinter, but that bid goes along with the swiss raise, 3NT showing 3M(334) and 4♦ showing a good 4M preempt.

 

I believe that's what Jdon's referring to, but there are a lot of variations of bergen, it seems.

[jillybean]

They are like country music, most people rightfully don't prefer it but they go too far in brutally hating it since it still has merit.

 

LOL at how many people claim to play 'bergen raises' and don't know the whole system including the 4 level bids.

Do you mean 1M:3oM showing unspecified splinter then the 4 level being used to show the shortage, or something else?

Yes, I didn't post anything about 1M 3oM showing an unspecified splinter, but that bid goes along with the swiss raise, 3NT showing 3M(334) and 4♦ showing a good 4M preempt.

 

I believe that's what Jdon's referring to, but there are a lot of variations of bergen, it seems.

There are a lot of variations in all aspects of this game. I would imagine most only play the 1M:3m 4 card raise, I don't know how useful the rest of it is, it doesn't seem to be widely used.

[jjbrr]

I agree it's not exceptionally useful. I liked to refer to Swiss raises as the "We should be in 3NT" convention when I played them. Bergen gives away a lot of information about your hand to the opponents for just a little bit of accuracy in some auctions.

[Jlall]

I agree it's not exceptionally useful. I liked to refer to Swiss raises as the "We should be in 3NT" convention when I played them.

Heh weird that's exactly what Patty and I called it back in the dayyy.

 

Bergen is fine for just a general system, but you can do better. At least the bids are defined. I would rather play bergen than strong jump shifts.

 

That said I would never play bergen in a serious partnership, for starters it's just grossly inefficient and can be compressed easily to make more room. Secondly as others have said I think weak raise is not really an important hand type, nor is the swiss.

 

I really like the good 1-4 a lot in a standard system though.

[jjbrr]

I agree it's not exceptionally useful. I liked to refer to Swiss raises as the "We should be in 3NT" convention when I played them.

Heh weird that's exactly what Patty and I called it back in the dayyy.

 

Bergen is fine for just a general system, but you can do better. At least the bids are defined. I would rather play bergen than strong jump shifts.

 

That said I would never play bergen in a serious partnership, for starters it's just grossly inefficient and can be compressed easily to make more room. Secondly as others have said I think weak raise is not really an important hand type, nor is the swiss.

 

I really like the good 1-4 a lot in a standard system though.

I probably picked it up from you, then.

[Mbodell]

I'm not a huge fan in general, but do like them over 1M X where the weights of advantages and disadvantages changes. It is now much less likely we have a SJS and somewhat less likely we have an invitational minor and much more valuable to eat up space quickly and communicate our strength and amount of support to help evaluate the part score battle.