[The_Badger]

It doesn't happen often on frequency, but given that a 1NT bid is forcing after 1♥/1♠ bid in 2/1, what's the best way to bid good pre-emptive hands (for example ♠x ♥J10x ♦x ♣AK109xxx to a 1♠ opener) as responder given that most other bids are covered by Bergen or splinter responses?

Does the ubiquitous 'dustbin' bid of 1NT cover this area, or do some players 'tweak' the system and avoid a 1NT response?

And how do players generally feel about the forcing 1NT response covering such a multitude of hands and handshapes, even extreme distributions?

And thirdly, and lastly, given that the 1NT is probably statistically the most likely response to 1♥/1♠, and 3NT is most popular contract, has the 1NT response - from a personal view - wrongsided many 3NT contracts and how do players feel generally about the strong hand being dummy and being exposed?

[wank]

If you want to pay Bergen you have to bid 1nt. You seem to imply Bergen is as standard as splinters.

[MrAce]

The_Badger, on 2017-July-16, 02:04, said:

It doesn't happen often on frequency, but given that a 1NT bid is forcing after 1♥/1♠ bid in 2/1, what's the best way to bid good pre-emptive hands (for example ♠x ♥J10x ♦x ♣AK109xxx to a 1♠ opener) as responder given that most other bids are covered by Bergen or splinter responses?

Does the ubiquitous 'dustbin' bid of 1NT cover this area, or do some players 'tweak' the system and avoid a 1NT response?

And how do players generally feel about the forcing 1NT response covering such a multitude of hands and handshapes, even extreme distributions?

And thirdly, and lastly, given that the 1NT is probably statistically the most likely response to 1♥/1♠, and 3NT is most popular contract, has the 1NT response - from a personal view - wrongsided many 3NT contracts and how do players feel generally about the strong hand being dummy and being exposed?

1-I do not play Bergen raises and never liked them. I play 1M--3m = invitation (8-11 hcp 6-7 cards). I have been playing it much before it has been published and suggested by some authors.

2- I like to play semi forcing NT(or w/e appropriate name you wanna call it) Which means 1 NT can only be up to 11 hcp or a bad 12 invitation hands so opener can pass with hands that would not accept any invitation. Downside is to play 1 NT when pd has a three card limit raise but I have yet to see a hand that it costed.

3-What you say can be true in some cases but you need to understand that playing forcing or semi forcing NT is not the cause. After all if you bid 1 NT with 3 card fit you will rarely end up playing 3 NT. What is left for forcing NT? The old natural 1 NT (6-9) or the old natural 2 NT (10-12) so you have not changed anything from the old testimony. So if there is a wrong siding now, it was there much before the forcing or semi-forcing NT.

[mike777]

The_Badger, on 2017-July-16, 02:04, said:

It doesn't happen often on frequency, but given that a 1NT bid is forcing after 1♥/1♠ bid in 2/1, what's the best way to bid good pre-emptive hands (for example ♠x ♥J10x ♦x ♣AK109xxx to a 1♠ opener) as responder given that most other bids are covered by Bergen or splinter responses?

Does the ubiquitous 'dustbin' bid of 1NT cover this area, or do some players 'tweak' the system and avoid a 1NT response?

And how do players generally feel about the forcing 1NT response covering such a multitude of hands and handshapes, even extreme distributions?

And thirdly, and lastly, given that the 1NT is probably statistically the most likely response to 1♥/1♠, and 3NT is most popular contract, has the 1NT response - from a personal view - wrongsided many 3NT contracts and how do players feel generally about the strong hand being dummy and being exposed?

Playing Bergen with an inv hand and long clubs you start with 1nt and rebid 3c.
With a weak hand and long clubs after 1h=1nt=2d or 2h=2s you rebid an impossible 2s to show
After 1s=1nt=2d or 2h or 2s you cannot show a weak hand with long clubs. A system hole you need to live with...with your example hand you either go ahead and rebid 3c anyway or you don't...good luck

[The_Badger]

Some interesting replies so far. Let me regroup. To wank and MrAce I would say I see so many intermediate and above players using Bergen responses as standard (why?) - I'm not a fan myself. I prefer MrAce's 3m treatment as constructive. (And thanks to mike777 too for clarifying the 1NT responses.)

As for bidding the hand given ♠x ♥J10x ♦xx ♣AK109xxx (apologies I missed a ♦ from the original post) in Acol, Sayc and standard Precision, for many it would be straightforward 2♣ response (even if the system is tweaked slightly), no messing about bidding nebulous 1NT responses, whereas with 2/1 you have to compromise. (I actually like bidding suits!)

I acknowledge what MrAce says that in times gone by when you did bid the natural 1NT (6-9) or 2NT (10-12) it may have wrongsided the contract too, and the strong hand became dummy, but at least the 1NT/2NT bidder would have had (usually) some sort of stops in the unbid suits. The 2/1 forcing 1NT response does cover a real spread of possible hand types, and because it is so nebulous, how does it fair in a competitive auction?

What I am trying to establish from this post is whether the forcing 1NT response punches it weight as a bid, or whether it has limitations due to the multitude of hands it can cover?

[MrAce]

The_Badger, on 2017-July-16, 15:06, said:

I acknowledge what MrAce says that in times gone by when you did bid the natural 1NT (6-9) or 2NT (10-12) it may have wrongsided the contract too, and the strong hand became dummy, but at least the 1NT/2NT bidder would have had (usually) some sort of stops in the unbid suits. The 2/1 forcing 1NT response does cover a real spread of possible hand types, and because it is so nebulous, how does it fair in a competitive auction?

1 NT or 2 NT response NEVER had the requirement of holding stopper(s) in unbid suits. Anyone who played bridge for sometime knows that kind of requirement is unplayable.

[johnu]

If I played Bergen I would .... wait ... I wouldn't play Bergen.

The common alternatives for 3♣ are

Strong jump shift - N/A for this hand
Natural, invitational - Less than game forcing, stronger than 1NT followed by 3♣ - That's what I would choose
Weak jump shift - Too good for this IMHO. I think 1NT followed by 3♣ should show the invitational hand.

Playing Bergen, your only choice seems to be to bid 1NT and rebid 3♣.

[johnu]

The_Badger, on 2017-July-16, 15:06, said:

Some interesting replies so far. Let me regroup. To wank and MrAce I would say I see so many intermediate and above players using Bergen responses as standard (why?) - I'm not a fan myself.

Novices play Bergen because that must be what they learned in bridge classes. Intermediates play Bergen because that's what they learned as novices. Not many expert players play Bergen because they have better uses for those bids. IIRC, even Bergen didn't play Bergen when he still played high level bridge.

[johnu]

mike777, on 2017-July-16, 12:02, said:

With a weak hand and long clubs after 1h=1nt=2d or 2h=2s you rebid an impossible 2s to show

Not sure what you are trying to say.

I play

1♥ - 1NT
2♦ - 2♠

would show a great hand for diamonds.

1♥ - 1NT
2♥ - 2♠

I would say 2♠ shows an invitational club or diamond hand.

if you play 3♣/3♦ as invitational, then it's not clear what 2♠ would show. Maybe very distributional with both minors.

[mike777]

johnu, on 2017-July-16, 16:49, said:

Not sure what you are trying to say.

I play

1♥ - 1NT
2♦ - 2♠

would show a great hand for diamonds.

1♥ - 1NT
2♥ - 2♠

I would say 2♠ shows an invitational club or diamond hand.

if you play 3♣/3♦ as invitational, then it's not clear what 2♠ would show. Maybe very distributional with both minors.

as I stated 2s would be "impossible 2s" it is a way to show a weak hand with long clubs or diamonds after starting 1h.
As I stated a rebid of 3c or 3d would be inv.

Playing Bergen after starting with 1s and if the opp are silent or we are an unpassed hand, you live with a system hole, no way to show a weak hand with long c or long d.(playing BART 1s=1nt=2c=? you can show a bit more)
With the example hand I would often just rebid 3c...gladly it is a rare auction give the above parameters.
----

btw you can also add on showing a good raise of pards second suit onto impossible 2s

1h=1nt
2c=3d good invite in d or 2s forces 2nt then
3c=strong club raise, 3d=long weak d
etc

[johnu]

mike777, on 2017-July-16, 17:23, said:

as I stated 2s would be "impossible 2s" it is a way to show a weak hand with long clubs or diamonds after starting 1h.
As I stated a rebid of 3c or 3d would be inv.

I've never seen it played that way.

[mr1303]

Fred wrote a good article about using the impossible 2S a while back. Most people don't use it very efficiently.

[mike777]

johnu, on 2017-July-16, 18:01, said:

I've never seen it played that way.

pls keep in mind we are discussing for this thread....Bergan and impossible 2s....and a bit of BART....we still must accept a system hole...if the opp are silent, if we are an unpassed hand.....

fwiw none of the above is new....these treatments are 10-20+ years old....you may have a more modern approach such as tfrs which are still ten years old..

[msjennifer]

(1) We dislike Bergen for the same reasons as given by johnu earlier.(2) We do not play a forcing NT which was given up by even Belladona and Garozzo in their Super Precision system.(3) We play 2/1 as forcing upto 2NT or 3 of a suit and certainly NOT GF.So in the given hand if P has opened 1S ,we bid 2C and rebid 3C as a sign off.(4) If P has opened 1H then we bid 2C and show Heart support at 3Level(we don't feel ashamed to bid it this way),as this 3H is a limit bid and not a GF..

[miamijd]

As has been noted above, assuming you play a standard form of 2/1:

1. If you play Bergen, you lose the ability to distinguish between intermediate (good but not GF) club hands and weak club hands on some auctions. You end up with an ugly choice on intermediate hands of (x) having to rebidding an offshape 2NT or else (y) bidding 3C and potentially missing a game. Not the end of the world, as (A) these hands don't come up that often and (B) when they do, it's surprising how often the opponents compete over your partner's 1M (especially 1S over 1H), giving you an easy 2C call.

Diamond hands are easier to handle, because if partner rebids the expected 2C, you have a 3D bid available, and if partner opens 1H and rebids 2D, you have a 2S call available. It's only the 1s-1N-2s hands that cause problems; there you sometimes can bid 2NT.

I'm surprised at all the negativity toward Bergen raises. I've blown hot and cold over them over the years. I currently don't play them unless a partner really wants to, but they do have their uses. Yes, the two 3m bids taken up by Bergen are nice to have for describing the intermediate hands, but on the other hand, the Bergen 3M preempt is nice to have, too.

One variant you can use with Bergen over 1S is to play 3D as your limit raise and 3H as your mixed raise. That gives you back the 3C bid to show the intermediate club hand. The intermediate H hands are handled by bidding 1NT and then skipping to 3H next round over 2m.

You can extend that treatment to 1H openings as well by playing 2S as your limit raise (or 2NT as your limit raise and 2S as your forcing raise) and 3D as your mixed raise. Again, that gives you back your 3C bid.

2. If you don't play Bergen, then you can either: (A) play 3m as a WJS and 1NT followed by 3m as the intermediate hand or (B) reverse these and play 3m as the intermediate hand and 1NT followed by 3m as weak. I prefer the latter and think it's more common.

3. The auction 1H-1NT-2H-2S can be used in a couple of different ways:

A. If 3C and 3D are both non-Bergen over 1M, then 2S can be used to show both minors and heart shortness, but you have to decide on the strength (weak or intermediate). If weak, then it's generally a H void and you have to bid 2NT (and hope for a spade stop) with the intermediate hand. If intermediate, then you generally pass with the weak 1-h hand and pick your better minor with the weak H void hand (if you're 3055, you just pass the weak hand). I prefer playing 2S as intermediate with both minors in this situation.

B. If 3C and 3D are both Bergen, then 2S can be used to help distinguish weak vs. intermediate one-suited minor hands (I actually prefer 2S to show the stronger hand and 3m the weaker one, b/c the opponents are more likely to X 2S and find a spade fit if the 2S bidder is weak). You can play a form of super-accepts here.

C. If 3C is non-Bergen and 3D is Bergen, then 2S varies depending on responder's subsequent bidding.

Cheers,
mike

[The_Badger]

Thanks for that comprehensive reply, mike (miamijd) +1

[helene_t]

Ditto 1M-3m should be natural and invitational. With the possible exception of 1♥-3♦ since you will be able to get the message across via 1NT. There is a slight problem with invitational jump, though: If your suit is not very good you may end up in the wrong partscore. Acol/SAYC players sometimes find a better part score before they bid their suit twice.

There is another problem with the wide-ranging 1NT response, namely 10-11 points and five hearts. The textbook treatment is
1♠-1NT
2m-2NT
and then some authors say that opener should now show a 3-card hearts fragment (if he is strong enough to bid on) while others say that it is better to lose the 3-5 fit in hearts on occasion in order not to give too much info to opps. Either way, you can lose the hearts fit and/or wrong-side a notrumps contract.

I think it is better to play, after 1♠:
2♣: natural gf or balanced. Some include invitational 3-card raises also.
2♦: invitational+ with hearts.
2♥: GF unbalanced with diamonds.

This is just theory, though. I have never played it

[miamijd]

helene_t, on 2017-July-17, 17:13, said:

Ditto 1M-3m should be natural and invitational. With the possible exception of 1♥-3♦ since you will be able to get the message across via 1NT. There is a slight problem with invitational jump, though: If your suit is not very good you may end up in the wrong partscore. Acol/SAYC players sometimes find a better part score before they bid their suit twice.

There is another problem with the wide-ranging 1NT response, namely 10-11 points and five hearts. The textbook treatment is
1♠-1NT
2m-2NT
and then some authors say that opener should now show a 3-card hearts fragment (if he is strong enough to bid on) while others say that it is better to lose the 3-5 fit in hearts on occasion in order not to give too much info to opps. Either way, you can lose the hearts fit and/or wrong-side a notrumps contract.

I think it is better to play, after 1♠:
2♣: natural gf or balanced. Some include invitational 3-card raises also.
2♦: invitational+ with hearts.
2♥: GF unbalanced with diamonds.

This is just theory, though. I have never played it

In your auction, if opener is going to game over 2NT, he definitely should "pattern out" by bidding 3H with 5314 or 5341. If he's 5332 with 17 (with 15-16, open 1NT), then 3NT is probably right.

Conventions like Gazilli and BART can sometimes help in these sorts of auctions, but BART is somewhat in disfavor nowadays and Gazilli (though a good treatment) has never caught on in the USA.

Cheers,
mike

[Kaitlyn S]

johnu, on 2017-July-16, 16:35, said:

Novices play Bergen because that must be what they learned in bridge classes. Intermediates play Bergen because that's what they learned as novices. Not many expert players play Bergen because they have better uses for those bids. IIRC, even Bergen didn't play Bergen when he still played high level bridge.

That is a sad commentary on the laziness of bridge teachers. IMO novices shouldn't learn any conventions except Stayman (and takeout doubles if you want to call that a convention) until they learn not to lead the Q from Qxx opposite Axx, not to lead fourth best from KQJ9x, to make forcing bids with 14 point responders that don't know the best game, and to bid more than 1S with an opening hand when partner makes a takeout double.

In my experience, most first time attendees to an "advanced" class do not know all of the above, and the only excuse for teaching these players Bergen or any other convention is that you need a steady stream of income from students that keep returning after realizing that they still don't know squat.

[The_Badger]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-July-17, 19:51, said:

That is a sad commentary on the laziness of bridge teachers. IMO novices shouldn't learn any conventions except Stayman (and takeout doubles if you want to call that a convention) until they learn not to lead the Q from Qxx opposite Axx, not to lead fourth best from KQJ9x, to make forcing bids with 14 point responders that don't know the best game, and to bid more than 1S with an opening hand when partner makes a takeout double.

In my experience, most first time attendees to an "advanced" class do not know all of the above, and the only excuse for teaching these players Bergen or any other convention is that you need a steady stream of income from students that keep returning after realizing that they still don't know squat.

Couldn't agree more, Kaitlyn. The number of players (some with high number ratings, too) on BBO that don't know the essentials, but think they are bridge supremoes with a plethora of conventions on their profiles still amazes me.

I learnt my bridge solely from books and magazines, playing against players better than me, and learning from my mistakes. And I am still learning...