[sfi]

johnu, on 2020-January-19, 20:41, said:

With 3 card trump support and limit raise strength, you initially respond 1NT forcing, and then rebid 3 of the major to show that hand.

That's not all that common around here, although some people do play it. More common among 2/1 players is one of:
- A jump to the other major
- Bundling it together with 4-card limit raises
- Using 2C to show a limit raise or a variety of FG raises

I have views about how good each of these methods is, but that's another conversation entirely.

[AL78]

johnu, on 2020-January-19, 20:41, said:

With 3 card trump support and limit raise strength, you initially respond 1NT forcing, and then rebid 3 of the major to show that hand.

I don't play 2/1 or 1NT forcing. It is not common where I live in the UK.

[johnu]

sfi, on 2020-January-19, 23:58, said:

That's not all that common around here, although some people do play it.

Bergen developed Bergen raises to work with 2/1 with forcing 1NT. If you don't play forcing 1NT, then you probably need to change your agreements but then you aren't playing Bergen raises, maybe you can call it modified Bergen, etc.

[Lovera]

AL78, on 2020-January-18, 07:01, said:

I got this one half right, which was about as effective as getting it completely wrong.

---

3♣ was Bergen, showing 8-11 HCP and three card support. After a think I judged slam had a fair chance if partner was not dirt minimum, and after checking we weren't missing two key cards, bid it.

I was right we had a slam on, I just got the suit wrong. There are 11 tricks on top. 6♣ is cold because the spades provide a heart discard and a heart ruff is the 12th trick. There is no such discard available in 6♠, so after trying the desparation attempt of running all the black suit winners (which needs South to hold all the red suit honors or North to have Hx in hearts and South holding the rest of the red suit honors, and he would have opened in that case), I went one down, which gave them back the top they had given us on the previous board when they punted a slam going two off.

I consider right the post-mortem (i don't use Bergem) by AL78.But here as i think: after W1♠ partner raise with 2♠(=direct raise showing 9-11 points - in my system i can enter at second only if i have 12/+ points). The partner hand is valutate in 10 points (minus 4-3-3-3 and J not protected -1 each plus +1 for K in ♠ and HCP). After W bid 3♣ it having force in second range showing the suit that E agree with 4♣. At this point is probable that the opps can interfer and defend ultheriorly if you thought that with this second fit can get six (6♦ vs 6♣) after realizing 6♠ as in start. It was destiny ? I don't think. This is the problem when you choise a fit having a second disponible. Rhightly with ♠ as trump you not have how to discard an eventual add loser whilest with ♣ there is this possibility that is always to consider.(Lovera)

[Lovera]

Lovera, on 2020-December-27, 04:01, said:

I consider right the post-mortem (i don't use Bergem) by AL78.But here as i think: after W1♠ partner raise with 2♠(=direct raise showing 9-11 points - in my system i can enter at second only if i have 12/+ points). The partner hand is valutate in 10 points (minus 4-3-3-3 and J not protected -1 each plus +1 for K in ♠ and HCP). After W bid 3♣ it having force in second range showing the suit that E agree with 4♣. At this point is probable that the opps can interfer and defend ultheriorly if you thought that with this second fit can get six (6♦ vs 6♣) after realizing 6♠ as in start. It was destiny ? I don't think. This is the problem when you choise a fit having a second disponible. Rhightly with ♠ as trump you not have how to discard an eventual add loser whilest with ♣ there is this possibility that is always to consider.(Lovera)