BBO Discussion Forums: Bergen raises - BBO Discussion Forums

"In contract bridge, Bergen raises are conventional treatments of responses to a major suit opening in a five-card major system.[1] Developed by Marty Bergen and first published in April 1982,[2] Bergen raises are based on the Law of total tricks, a hand evaluation concept which states that with a combined nine trumps in the partnership one should compete to at least the three-level regardless of combined high card strength.

Bergen recommended that instead of the more rare occurrence in the use of the 3♣ and 3♦ response as a jump shift to show a strong hand, these bids should be redeployed to provide more precise information about the length and strength of support held by responder for partner's five-card major suit opening when responder has four-card support.

Bergen raises are used in response to a 1♥ or 1♠ opening bid to show hands of specific length in trump support and strength as follows:

1NT followed by 3♥/3♠ on next round – invitational to game (typically 11-12 high card points) with three-card support
2♥/2♠ – weak (7-10 high card points) with three-card support
3♣ – weak (typically 7-10 high card points) with four-card support
3♦ – a limit raise (typically 11-12 high card points) with four-card support; invitational to game
3♥/3♠ – very weak (preemptive, typically less than 7 high card points) and four-card support
4♥/4♠ – very weak (preemptive, typically less than 7 high card points) and five-card support
Over 3♣, Opener may sign off in trumps, but a bid of 3♦ asks partner to bid three of the major with a weaker hand, i.e. 7-8 points, or bid four with a stronger hand, i.e. 9-10 points.

Many partnerships which employ Bergen raises also use Jacoby 2NT and splinter bids in response to major suit openings for game-forcing hands with trump support. A direct raise to game is then preemptive on a very shapely hand (often with five card trump support).

Modifications to Bergen responses do exist. One such method (usually called Reverse Bergen) is to reverse the meanings of the two minor suit responses at the three level, thereby creating a system of responses that denote progressively weaker hands on subsequent bids." wiki

Wouldn't it be nice if Gib gave us Marty's lovely convention, at least as an option.

If I was going to create of list of new treatments and conventions that GIB could play, Bergen would not be on my list. I would have gotten tired and quit before Bergen made an appearance.

johnu, on 2017-September-07, 12:28, said:

lol I guess that says it all. If I was going to create of list of new treatments and conventions that GIB could play, I would throw Gib into the garbage bin first.

"Bergen would not be on my list. I would have gotten tired and quit before Bergen made an appearance. "

Wow is that a political statement does he work for Mr Trump or trumps or something? What is your agenda?

Bergen is a lovely convention, played by many who appreciate it, it is simple and it works.

Certainly better than anything I have seen on Gib.

I hope Gib is not being programmed by any "agenda"

I cannot understand that attitude. I have spent the whole day arguing the demerits of leb, a system that is complicated, hard to learn and with the rewards hardly worth the effort. Yet it gets all the support, and people will argue for hours in support of it. Here we have a simple convention, easy to learn, it works, it helps find(or avoid) game and slam contracts better and anyone from a beginner onward can understand it.

Yet you talking like no bridge player will ever achieve anything if they played Bergen? What is your agenda?

Surely the programmers of Gib have a huge responsibilty to the future of bridge.

Not everybody wants to win the Bermuda Bowl, most just want to get on with simple bridge, robots fill that function. They are learning tools too.

It's not that Bergen raises are bad - they're just not that great. They are not even primarily designed to help you find better games and slams. Most of Bergen's points in the book where he introduces them are about better judging the competitive auction.

As before, play them if you want. But there are hardly a necessary tool. And there are better treatments that have been invented since the mid-1980's.

What is Gib and what does it mean to bridge.

Perhaps Gib programmers are forgetting their roles here.

Gib is a robot, a fun novelty where poeple can play bridge with without humans

A huge learning tool, as they are easy to access and very private, so one can gain confidence without embarrassing themselves.

I was shocked to see my neighbors daughter of 11 years old playing bridge on Gib. In my day you didn't even start the game until you were 20 or so.

She was given a few simple instructions, and then sat clicking all day like it was just another computer game.

My point is, that when she is ready she will go into the main lounge and start playing "real bridge"

What conventions will she play, how will she play them? Bidding is a language it must be constructed well and be simple and universal.
Gib has set the standard (poor at that) she will find her partners by this standard.

Why are we teaching bridge by such low bidding standards?

sfi, on 2017-September-08, 17:38, said:

What better treatments, I dont see them, not on Gib anyway. What you are saying is that since you are finding your contracts without it, no one needs it. I can tell you, after 40 years of winning bridge at national level, I still need it, when you have a 9 card fit nothing is more accurate. Of course I can play without it, but why? It is using 3 level bids that have no real useful function anyway.

You use Truscott but not Bergen, what is the difference really, the passed hand?

sfi, on 2017-September-08, 17:38, said:

Oops I almost forgot to mention, its great in competitive auctions.

Bermy, on 2017-September-08, 17:06, said:

LOL, no agenda except that I am not a Bergen fanboy. If bridge had different rules so that you had virtually unlimited responses

e.g.

1♠ 3.01♣ Meaning 1
...........3.02♣ Meaning 2
...........3.03♣ Meaning 3

Then I might use one of those additional options for Bergen raises. But you don't have an unlimited number of responses and Bergen takes up 2 bids 3♣/3♦ that could be used for something more useful. Players got around fine before Bergen raises were invented, and if they were really necessary (according to you "a simple convention, easy to learn, it works, it helps find(or avoid) game and slam contracts better and anyone from a beginner onward can understand it.") why wouldn't all the expert players adopt this???

johnu, on 2017-September-09, 12:48, said:

And so the Gib way is better? Gib does not bid like "any" expert I have ever played with or against. Well maybe like BBO self evaluation of "expert" perhaps

Join our Fanboy club, we are having such a great time here, Im sure we can win, I might even make you secretary of Defence

Bermy, on 2017-September-09, 13:07, said:

I think so. Lots of things are more useful to have then Bergen raises, one of them is lebensohl.

Conveniently, there are many other computer programs out there that DO play Bergen raises.

For example, when I want to practice MOSCITO, I don't sit an complain that BBO's GIBs don't play MOSCITO, rather, I fire up Jack.
And a good time is had by all.

hrothgar, on 2017-September-09, 17:11, said:

How would you rate Jack compared to GIB? Bidding? Defense? Declarer?

johnu, on 2017-September-09, 17:38, said:

Vastly superior in bidding and defense

A better declarer as well

johnu, on 2017-September-09, 17:04, said:

I dont know your role or your agenda but

Perhaps that explains why Gib bidding is in such a mess.

We have to endure the politics of its programmers, as they have their own agenda (as this conversation proves)

Few would agree that Bergen is that bad, or leb that good, but they stick with their agenda I have not even begun to discuss some of the other conventions yet, wait, and the way Gib handles take outs and penalties.

Then we get a gib that cant bid leb any better than a novice, and wastes all its 3 level bids...........

Then we get excuses that you would rather die than get this right.

What a level of incompetence! I hope ACBL are listenning, but I guess its only Gib's dollar twenty five that they are really interested in.

hrothgar, on 2017-September-09, 17:50, said:

Yet no one has explained to me yet why Gib does not compete at the robot world bridge championship. Come on! you claim you are giving us world class "expert" bidding, show us. Play against world class robots please.

I rather suspect it is because Gib would get dumped.

johnu, on 2017-September-09, 17:38, said:

why are we arguing, set up a match and finished.

hrothgar, on 2017-September-09, 17:11, said:

And how many of these robots give us choice of systems and conventions?

I do know Saitek does.

"For example, when I want to practice MOSCITO, I don't sit an complain that BBO's GIBs don't play MOSCITO, rather, I fire up Jack.
And a good time is had by all"

That explains how important these robots are, if one wants to improve ones bridge bidding.

Funny , all this

When we talk "leb" we talk drivel for pages.

When we talk "Bergen" we talk about better robots.