[lexica]

North (me) holds:
S KQ3
H Q42
D K52
C KQJ2

South (partner) holds:
S A8764
H AJ9
D T4
C T72

(full layout at bottom)

Partner's lamentations:

Quote

Hi lex -

Board 7
Playing texas, bidding should go
W      N        E      S
                          P
1D    1N      2H    4H*
P        4S*  5H    X       
PPASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

4H (TEXAS) is a free GAME BID from me.
It creates a  FORCING PASS situation - so if opps compete over our
game,
then a pass from one of us forces the other to either X the opps or bid
again - allowing opps to steal our game contract without penalty is not
permitted.

So - I double 5H - to PREVENT you from bidding 5S. You have no reason
to
over-rule me.
If instead I PASS 5H - then I am saying "You DECIDE partner - double or
5S"

I see that your love affair with the double continues to be stormy and
chaotic.

There is more to Forcing Pass than indicated here.

Declarer is south.
I don't agree the above bid (4H) would be Texas - am I wrong?
Thnx for replies!
Elena

This post has been edited by lexica: 2004-May-11, 12:00

[Flame]

Im not sure i understand what you're asking, i see that you bid 4sp over 4h so you did understand it is transfer, do you ask if 4h should be a transfer here, or maybe you ask if the name stays the same after interference ? or maybe you ask if this situation is forcing pass. so ill answer all of the above.
1. i think this bid should be transfer.
2. who cares about names, you can call it bubu.
3. when partner bid game over your 1nt i would take that as a forcing pass creating bid unless agreed otherwise.

about the actual bid, your partner's 4h is not best discribing his hand, but if you cant find a better bid the its ok.
your 4sp already showed spade fit and you already showed maybe more offense power then you have, therefore you have no resson to think about bidding more, no matter if this forcing pass or not, you are happy with doubling them.

[lexica]

Thnx Flame.
The real bidding was very different; sry I didn't make it clear that this bidding is what p suggests and claims that this is the way Texas transfers can be employed , too (that is my problem, it might be some very good transfer which I unfortunately don't play and I don't think it is Texas - which I do play, however badly).

[mishovnbg]

Hi Elena!
Texas is convention without competition. You can use it in competition too, only if you have such agreements with p. So answer is "no", 4♥ is not Texas, untill you not agree such bid. Is 4♥ will be good as transfer for ♠ - the answer is "yes" if your partner know about it. Hand in example is not suitable for such bid - not enough length in ♠! If you play leb right bid is 3♠: GF with 5+♠. If you play rub right bid is 3♥: inv+, 5+♠.
Forcing pass situation established by bidding game ONLY if you are in vul and even such convention is not so common.
Misho

[lexica]

Thnx, Misho!
1) No agreement but partner and I communicate telepathically - that is when he transmits, I am expected to receive. Results are predictable
2) I play Texas over opening 1nt (with or without interference); also, if I overcall 1NT and there is either no bid or there is a take-out dbl - then my partner can texas (and hopefully i'll remember);
3) all were vulnerable.

[Flame]

lexica, on May 11 2004, 01:10 PM, said:

Thnx Flame.
The real bidding was very different; sry I didn't make it clear that this bidding is what p suggests and claims that this is the way Texas transfers can be employed , too (that is my problem, it might be some very good transfer which I unfortunately don't play and I don't think it is Texas - which I do play, however badly).

I dont think transfer matter here, sure i dont know how the bidding went at your table, but you dont need transfer to get this one right.
Taxas transfers are very simple bid 4d with 6+hearts or 4h with 6+S after openers 1nt. partner dont have a choice but accepting the transfer.
There are also the jacoby transfers which are similar but at the 2 level meaning 2d and 2h are transfers to H and S, those can be made with only 5 card either as a sign off bid, or as a way to invastigate for game or choosing the right game or for slam bidding. also partner can bid something else then 2 of the major , this is call super accpetions which is usually done with a good hand (max) and 4 card support.
If you need a full descrition i can give it to you.

[lexica]

Thnx Flame - I play them the way you suggest. I (try to) use the treatments suggested in Lawrence Conventions disk M. Hardy's Adv bidding for the 21st c which are pretty much what everyone plays, I guess. Partner, however, was adamant that this is wrong.

[luis]

This is why South African transfers are better,
use 4c->4h and 4d->4s instead of Texas.
It clears the ambiguity of 4h in competitive auctions and it's more difficult to have an "accident"

[jjj999]

Actual biiding proceeded :
east south west north
pass
1D 1NT 2H 4S
pass pass 5H X
pass 5S pass pass
X

South does NOT play lebensohl and her profile does not mention texas, so north chose to bid 4S instead of 3S (forcing in lebensohl) - in case partner passes.
So I agree that 4S was not ideal - but the enemy bidding increased probability of 5-3 fit. 4S makes.
Some play Forcing Pass only when vuln.
Some play Forcing Pass only if vuln against non-vuln.
Some play Forcing Pass whenever a game forcing bid has been employed.
Some play Forcing Pass whenever game has been bid without pressure from the opps.

5Hx should not be removed since south has balanced hand of known strength.

[lexica]

Joe, the isuue here is not the actual bidding - the problem is how you play texas (pls read the email you sent).
As to the actual bidding - I said at the table yesterday that you were right about my wrong decision to remove the double.

[jjj999]

OK Lex - for future ref I play texas is ON over any enemy interference up to 3NT.

I think most people play texas over any nme bid up to 3S - some say 3D.

Lebensohl is a really useful convention - worth a little effort.

Ciao

[lexica]

OK Lex - for future ref I play texas is ON over any enemy interference up to 3NT.
It's up to you and your partner/s, Joe.
Thank you for the advice about Lebensohl - it requires some more time, though - and I believe we discussed this before as well.

[Flame]

Actually as the bidding went, if its not a forcing pass situation then 5sp is not that bad.

[aray007]

Hi, Joe, the lovely fight is back again
While I understand that your double was OK and 5Hx should not be removed and also you have the ambiguity whether you are playing Lebensohl/Texas or not? You could have certainly used 3S as a forcing bid and got a reply of 4S which would have given the impression you need something from your partnerin spades whereas in actual bidding it did not suggest... I agree that even after that 5Hx should not be removed. But u must agree 3S is a far better option than the shot in the dark like 4S was.
Also the example of Texas you have given is wrong... As for 4th level transfers you need to have 6 cards... just because you are not playing certain conventions i.e. Lebensohl, another convention cannot be altered. If you think of LTC your texas transfer would actually mean you are having a 9 card fit rather than the 8 card fit and decision must be based on these actual trump counts often (not on this deal though).
Best of luck for your continued partnership with Lex!
Over!!!
Aray

[Free]

I don't agree that 4♥ should be texas. You have bids enough (like 3♥ Rubensohl) to show ♠, so you don't need to jump for no reason. Imo 4♥ should rather be a 4-1-4-4 (or 4-0-45) distribution, looking for the best game, since it's an unusual jump.

Welcome to the forum btw

[jjj999]

Aray - Free - hi both - in my view there is a minimum subset of common conventions that you can assume from an experienced partner. Conventions of such obvious worth, that no-one in their right mind would ignore them. Lebensohl and texas ( with/without interference ) being somewhere near the top. When you are not able to count on that minimum set of conventions/agreements - you are forced to make compromises - to make inferior bids.
I would count 3S or 3H as unconditionally forcing to game - but if I am not sure that partner will do likewise - then i may feel compelled to select some inferior bid.

Ciao - Joe

[Shrike]

Given no unusual agreements (of which Rubensohl is one possibility), I would assume in the US that Texas transfers are on in competition with any partner who plays them at all. How high? I would assume transfers over interference through 3D, though many (especially less experienced, in my experience) players play them higher -- perhaps as high as 4C (though I believe this to be a very bad idea -- anything above 3H gets in the way of important natural bids).

The decision should not be affected by the 1NT bid's being an overcall, not an opening.

In a usual, intermediate-plus partnership desk partnership in the US, I would assume Texas through 3D, and Lebensohl (fast denies). South would then probably bid 3S, although 4H is not ridiculous.

[Trpltrbl]

I play with some pd's that if you can still Jump, it is Texas.
With others I play South African to differ between good hands and hands that I want to try 4 of a major.
With this particular hand, I know you didn't ask but still, I would bid 3♠ ( Lebensohl ) GF with 5♠. And I play that with all my pd's

Mike

[lbyer]

Firstly if ops 2♥ bid is natural - then 4♥ must imply at least 5 spades (what else can it be??).

Personally, I don't like Texas - I don't see why it is important to reach the 4 level so quickly when partner advertises a powerful hand. Are we worried ops will get in and bid 4?? That's a big risk to them - all the more so if they don't know the strength of responder's hand. I think this would only be feasible under favourable vulnerability

[inquiry]

lbyer, on Jun 9 2004, 08:38 AM, said:

Personally, I don't like Texas - I don't see why it is important to reach the 4 level so quickly when partner advertises a powerful hand. Are we worried ops will get in and bid 4?? That's a big risk to them - all the more so if they don't know the strength of responder's hand. I think this would only be feasible under favourable vulnerability

There are a couple advantages to texas.... here are just a few...

1NT-4H-4S-4NT is RKCB with spades trumps
1NT-2H-2S-4NT is quantatitive, and partner can pass

1NT-4H-4S-Pass is to play
1NT-2H-2S-4S is mildly invintational to slam

So texas, if you choos to play it, is more than two different ways to get to 4 of a major...