[Free]

Lately I see many people play reversed Bergen raises over a 1M opening. What is that exactly, and what are the advantages & disadvantages opposite the normal Bergen raises?

[Flame]

If revese mean playing 1H-3c= 10-11 3D= 6-9, its oviosly a bad idea since after 3d you cant reinvite. So lets look at the more intresting 3C= 8-11 3D=6-7.
To me its seems like he normal bergen is better for two ressons. First without intrfirence there is a small advantage in the normal way, since in the games and slams bidding there will be less info given to the opponents for free, for example 1H-3D-4H in normal bergen will now turn into either 1H-3C-4H or 1H-3C-3D-4H/something else. when both opener and responder gave more info to opponents.
With interference playing the specific bid to be 10-11 is imo an advantage since with 10-11 you will have more games so the specific bid helps you in game bidding and not partscore ones.
One more thing i like doing with normal bergen (or our version of it) is add slam hands to the 6-9 bid, this works well for our limited opening 1M. We dont need a bid for GF with 4 card support, with minimum game we just bid 4M (this give less info opponents might think they need to double or to overbid us) and with little better then GF we bid the 6-9.

[ArcLight]

>Lately I see many people play reversed Bergen raises over a 1M opening. What is that exactly, and what are the advantages & disadvantages opposite the normal Bergen raises?

I think when the convention was first published in the ACBL Bulletin in 1982 the responses were reversed. The point ranges and # of support cards are the same, just that the signals are reversed.

[inquiry]

Free, on Sep 16 2004, 10:14 AM, said:

Lately I see many people play reversed Bergen raises over a 1M opening. What is that exactly, and what are the advantages & disadvantages opposite the normal Bergen raises?

One or the other responses (3D or 3C) has to be weaker than the other.

For the sake of clarity, I will call 3C the weak response, and I will give it a wide range, let's say 6-10 hcp. Then, lets call 3D strong, and give it a narrow range. 11/12. This I will call normal Bergen.

You put a wide range on 3C so that partner can bid 3D to invite you to go on if you are minimum or max. IF partner opens 1H and you bid 3D, he will have no room to invite. He must signoff (3H) or bid game/slam try. So 3D has to be VERY NARROWLY defined.

Now, you could reverse this. You could make 3D the weak hand, and 3C the strong hand. But again, make 3D very narrowly defined. Say 7 or 8, and give 3C the wider range (9 to 12). Once again opener bids game or signs off over 3D, but can invite over 3C.

I like 3C being weak. There are several obvious advantages.. but then, I don't play bergen....

Ben

[Rebound]

This discussion led me to read a description of Bergen ( I had no prior knowledge of it ) and it seems like it could be pretty useful. When playing with one of my normal partners, we play v vs. nv and in 4th seat at equal vul, 2-level bids are intermediate, 1 level openings are disciplined. Nv vs. v, Bergen could be used.

What do you folks think?

[luke warm]

i've played bergen for years... so far the only 2 to vote have said 3c is better used for the constructive (7-9 hcp) raise and 3d for the limit (10-12)... i play just the opposite, tho i did play that way for years... that's the way it was first put forth, so the 3c as limit is called reverse bergen

bergen himself was persuaded to change it by some friends, based on the preemptive values involved... figuring the 7-9 hand would occur more often than the 10-12, he changed that to 3d, thus taking one bid away from the ops... it did take the game try bid away if 1h was opened, but he felt it was worth it

i don't understand playing it nv but not v, rebound... i play it except in 3rd seat, but the truth is i haven't seen any bad effects from playing it all the time and just scrapping drury

[1eyedjack]

luke warm, on Sep 16 2004, 02:06 PM, said:

the truth is i haven't seen any bad effects from playing it all the time and just scrapping drury

I think it is very difficult to measure this. The temptation is to count only those hands that qualify for a Bergen raise when you are playing Bergen, discover that you do not lose and indeed sometimes gain, and conclude (in my view without justification) that this proves the case for Bergen. In order for the proof to be rigorous you have to count also the results on those hands that might have qualified for some other treatment of the 3m response, but which treatment is denied you because you are playing Bergen, but I fear that few make that effort.

[luke warm]

i understand those views... i know, from having played bergen for years, where the most 'hurt' comes from... usually from a well-timed lead directing double... but even then, quite often the double serves to have a suit led that turns out to be not the best for the defense

i never said there was *no* downside to the convention, but i firmly believe that the upside *far* outweighs any downside... btw, i don't scrap rev drury with most people, simply because they insist on using it... it's a very good convention... i just said that, given 4 card support, i haven't seen any ill effects from playing bergen in all seats ('cept for maybe 4333 hands, but i've already spoken on that)

[1eyedjack]

Again: you appear to be counting in the equation those hands that qualify for Bergen but which turn out badly (lead directing double of Bergen bid). That is very laudable, but incomplete. What about those hands that qualify for mini-splinters, or fit-showing jump shifts, or even weak jump shifts, or whatever else alternative use for the 3m response might be used? If you have (say) a mini-splinter type of response, and you are playing Bergen, you have to start with a different response. Do you after each such hand consider whether your result is better or worse than had you been using mini-splinters instead of Bergen, and count those pluses and minuses in the judgement of Bergen?

[sceptic]

I play reverse bergen

3 club = 10 - 12 and 4 card support
3 diamond = 7 - 9 and 4 card support

we also play jacoby 2nt

and reverse drury for 3rd 4th seat openers

the advantage (and I am sure I will be corrected) is that if you play reverse bergen 3 the club now gives p more room to cue bid (3D and 3H are available) as opposed to bidding 3 diamond, which only gives you 3 H to cue bid

anyway I have played it now for 3 months and I get better results than I used to so I like it.

I am only intermediate standard, so experts my disagree

[nilbes]

I also have been playing reverse drury for a long time and have lets say 80% encountered no drastic results :-)) have even profited from its use


3D response is a very defined hand: 4 card support 6-9 HCP and no singleton which gives the declarer a pretty good picture where to stop and what to do if opponents interfere also steals the 2 club bid from opps :-)))

3C has 2 meanings : either 6-9HCP with a singleton or 9-11HCP balanced so opener can again evaluate his hand either way with a min. opening the declarer bids 3 M or goes to game with a better opening or unbalanced hand .I use the 3 D ask for sing. only for slam trial where that singleton could be so useful that with a total of 26 HCP u could play it happened to me the other day

AKxxx Qxxx
xxx x
KQx Axxxx
AJxx Q10x

1S 3C
3D 3H and i happily went for a slam:-)))

Also with 9+ to 11 HCP with singleton and again 4 card support I use splinter and 12+ hands with 4 card support are 2 NTJ responses.

I think the whole trick here is the 4+card support (3card supports always go through forcing nt) and the hand evaluation how the 2 hands will fit.

I am happy with these conventions and recommened them if played combined but being no expert I am also open to different suggestions :-))))

[luke warm]

1eyedjack, on Sep 17 2004, 07:58 AM, said:

Again: you appear to be counting in the equation those hands that qualify for Bergen but which turn out badly (lead directing double of Bergen bid). That is very laudable, but incomplete. What about those hands that qualify for mini-splinters, or fit-showing jump shifts, or even weak jump shifts, or whatever else alternative use for the 3m response might be used? If you have (say) a mini-splinter type of response, and you are playing Bergen, you have to start with a different response. Do you after each such hand consider whether your result is better or worse than had you been using mini-splinters instead of Bergen, and count those pluses and minuses in the judgement of Bergen?

the question revolved around bergen vs. rev bergen.. of the two, i prefer rev bergen... however, i also said that after playing it awhile one might want to 'refine' the bids, or add in other bids... that's what i do... here's my preferred treatment, all with 4 card support:

1h/2nt or 1s/2nt=16+ balance hand
1h/3s or 1s/3nt=over j/s, 12-15 unspecified splinter.. next cheapest asks, step responses
1h/3d or 1s/3h=under j/s, 9-11 unspecified splinter.. next cheapest asks, step responses.. this is a game force
1h/3h or 1s/3s=0-6
1h/4h or 1s/4s=0-7
1h/3c=7-11 balanced.. 3d by opener asks if limit or not... any bid other than 3h shows limit + control in suit bid... if no control, 4h
1s/3d=same as above... 3nt by responder (after 3h ask) shows heart control
1M/4c=balanced 12-15 with 2 of top 3 (if 4 cards), one of top 3 if five
1M/4d=same as above but without the honor support

i don't think i made a typo, i'll check later... also, i'm sure the above isn't the optimum way to play this, but it seems to work ok

[BrianEDuran]

Hi

Since nobody has mentioned my reason for playing Reverse Bergen instead of standard version, I thought I would through it out there. I have a general overall system agreement the strong hand are always slow. Basically just like faster arrival but also to do with conservation of space. The strong hand now has more room to look for slam. While in Two Drury and Bergen Raise this may be a detrimental, it is nice to have a rule to follow. Makes it very easy two figure out an agreement you had about strong a weak hand. For example puppet stayman (2NT-3C; 3D) and you have 4-4 in the major, is 4C or 4D a stronger?

Brian