[Quantumcat]

I came up with this after having a few Jacoby auctions and not being totally certain whether we had slam values or not.

Whatever your Bergen raises are, you can change this to fit by substituting your strongest one for my strongest one, etc.

After 1♠:

2NT = 13-14 4-card raise (or equivalent "minimum sensible game force")
3♣ = 9-12 4-card raise (opener can invite)
3♦ = 7-8 4-card raise or 17+ 4-card raise (or equivalent "serious slam interest or better")
3♥ = 5-6 4-card raise or 15-16 4-card raise (or equivalent "better than minimum, mild slam interest")
3♠ = 0-4 4-card raise

After 1♥ (people have been dropping the level of similar bids after 1♥ than 1♠ for a long time so that part's not new):

2♠ = 13-14 4-card raise
2NT = 9-12 4-card raise
3♣ = 7-8 4-card raise or 17+ 4-card raise
3♦ = 5-6 4-card raise or 15-16 4-card raise
3♥ = 0-4 4-card raise

The 3-card invites are contained in a multi-2♣ response so you don't need to worry about those.

With the stronger range, you can either bid a suit as a cue, or bid 3NT, which you can assign your own meaning to. Could be just asking pard if he thinks slam is a possibility now that responder has a strong hand - cues if so, bids 4-major if he really thinks slam isn't on.

The strength differences are easy to remember, you add approximately ten HCP to the lower range to get the higher range.

With this, you automatically know whether you have slam values or not. You also give no information to opponents after a Jacoby bid - if you see no hope for slam opposite 13-14, you can simply bid 4-major.

[mgoetze]

Sorry, I am rather new at this game... can you please tell me how many points you need to have "slam values"?

[Quantumcat]

I am thinking of the times when you have around a 15-16-count as opener, and partner bids Jacoby, and cues after I show my shortage. Is he cueing politely, in case I have slam interest by myself, but he actually just has a nice 12-count? Or when you are responder with a 15-count and you bid Jacoby, and partner bids 3-major - usually that says no shortage, and not total crap (e.g. balanced 10-11(12) count). Does he have a good hand, or just an ok 12 or 13 count? If I cue, he may think I am just cueing politely in case he has a big hand.

If, instead, you bid 4-major with any minimum and cue only when you have at least mild slam interest, the other person may have a big hand and now has no room to investigate slam properly. You might as well have gone back to beginner days when you counted up your points and if they plus partner's equalled 25-30, you bid 4-major.

[mgoetze]

 Quantumcat, on 2012-June-07, 20:43, said:

You might as well have gone back to beginner days when you counted up your points and if they plus partner's equalled 25-30, you bid 4-major.

Isn't that exactly what you're doing?

I usually have just a single bid for all the invitational or better (non-splinter) 4-card raises. But my response structure seems to be very different from what you describe, maybe you should look into that...

[Cthulhu D]

The response structure to 1H - 2NT (Inv+) that goes like

3C - Any minimum (I play less than ace more than a minimum opener, but w/e works for you)
3D - Asking Relay
3D - Extras with shortness (3H asks)
3H - Big extras with good trumps
3S - Second suit, extras
3NT - Big balanced hand, to strong for 1NT
4C/D - Second suit with extras.

The key is the 3C minimum which solves your problem. It clearly defines the captain of the hand, and it's much easier to see what's going on as you've shown extras with the first bid and can relay out. 1H-2NT-3C-3H is NF with a limit raise only and opener can bid 4H with a nice 14 count or whatever. 1H-2NT-3C-4H is to play. You can use 3NT as serious slam interest easily as you put 3 card limit raises through 2C.

Phil, mgoetze and other forum regulars have proposed this before, check out http://www.bridgebas...dpost__p__66326 or mgoetze's BBF systems index.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

I think it has merit.

The 9-12 range seems rather wide and the 7,8 seems too narrow .

Maybe 10-12 and 7-9 ??

[Trinidad]

 TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-June-08, 03:08, said:

I think it has merit.

The 9-12 range seems rather wide and the 7,8 seems too narrow .

Maybe 10-12 and 7-9 ??

When the 9-12 range is shown, there is more bidding room to find out whether it is 9 or 12. Therefore, the 9-12 range should be somewhat wider than the 7-8 range. The interesting mathematical question is: "How much wider?"

I think you could come up with answers for the cases where the opponents are quiet (1.618 times wider or 1.5 if you want 3M to be your horizon), but it is difficult to say how much wider if the opponents might get difficult. Maybe a linear sliding scale would be good depending on the probability that the opponents will interfere. Something like

[Width (high range)] / [Width (low range)] = 1 + (1.618 - 1)*(100-[average age off opponents])/100

might be a good first order approximation.



Rik

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Gametries are probably more important for the Constructive ( or Mixed ) Raises by Responder, yet there is only ONE gametry available :
after 1♠
1S - 3D! ( 7-9 , typically 8 or 9 LTC )
3H! ( Opener makes a gametry with no more than 6 LTC ) - Responder accepts w/8 but declines w/9 )