[nikos59]

Everything has pro and cons.

For instance, if you scrap Texas you can use the
4D bid as the French do, namely a major 2suiter
with no slam interest, just game. Opener places
the contract.
As to 4H, 4S you can keep them "to play"
(I like to be able to forego the transfer on some
special hands) or you can find some very specific meaning.

What kind of hand (shape for instance) would be bid with
1NT - 2H
2S - 4S
to show a mild slam interest, as advertized by Ben
when Texas is used?

n

[the hog]

What kind of hand (shape for instance) would be bid with
1NT - 2H
2S - 4S
to show a mild slam interest, as advertized by Ben
when Texas is used?

6223 or 7222, iow no shortage else you autosplinter.

[Chamaco]

Once a similar accident occurred to me playing in an game on BBO.
My occasional pard was "advanced", and we both had agreed on playing regular Texas.

However, bidding went something like
1NT-(2C)-4D and, thinking Texas off in competition, I raised to 5D.

My pard was rather furious and explained to me (besides advices on which kind of game would be best suitable for me) that it is Standard to play Texas on IF IT IS A JUMP.

[BTW- A similar misunderstanding occurred to me today- Free was kibitzing, but this time I was the 4D bidder in competition, my pard raised me to an excellent 5D in a 3-2 fit ].

Now I am curious on whether it is correct to assume that *if Texas is agreed*, it is standard to treat it regardless of opps overcall provided it's a jumpbid.

Thanks !

Mauro

[the hog]

Don't know what is "standard", Mauro, but we certainly play texas OFF after all intervention aprt from after a X. It makes sense in a way, because its easy to remember - transfers off, texas off, transfers on, texas on.

Ron

[Gerardo]

Usually Texas is still on if overcall is below 3♦ (not including)

[Chamaco]

Gerardo, on Jun 10 2004, 04:16 AM, said:

Usually Texas is still on if overcall is below 3♦ (not including)

Thx G, so that is the treatment I wa aware of.
1NT-(overcall)-4D/4H is still texas provided 4D/4H is a jump bid.

[lbyer]

Re showing mild slam interest without using Texas

Why not bid 1N - 2♥ - 2♠ - 4♣,♦ (whether a cue bid or a real second suit - it implies a hand with some slam interest - partner may elect to bid RKC, cue bid, support second suit, or with a minimum and little trump support - stop in 4♠

[Chamaco]

lbyer, on Jun 10 2004, 01:18 PM, said:

Re showing mild slam interest without using Texas

Why not bid 1N - 2♥ - 2♠ - 4♣,♦ (whether a cue bid or a real second suit - it implies a hand with some slam interest - partner may elect to bid RKC, cue bid, support second suit, or with a minimum and little trump support - stop in 4♠

In "standard", I believe 4C is Gerber, ace asking.

I think the Nt bidder should know for sure whether an eventual cue is honor or shortness, in order to upgrade/downgrade his hand on the basis of "wasted" honors (opposite shortness) or superfit.

Generic cuebid is nor something appealing to me until the hand has been descripted better

[luke warm]

with this hand, is texas (whether on or off) the right bid? i agree that it's *likely* lex has 3 spades, but i'd still think 3♥ would be the better bid (assuming, as was stated, no leb).. then it seems that lex can bid 3♠ with 3 cards else 3nt.. but maybe i'm missing something

[Gerardo]

Chamaco, on Jun 10 2004, 11:23 AM, said:

lbyer, on Jun 10 2004, 01:18 PM, said:

Re showing mild slam interest without using Texas

Why not bid 1N - 2♥ - 2♠ - 4♣,♦ (whether a cue bid or a real second suit - it implies a hand with some slam interest - partner may elect to bid RKC, cue bid, support second suit, or with a minimum and little trump support - stop in 4♠

In "standard", I believe 4C is Gerber, ace asking.

Not playing Texas Mauro, you already have a way to Ask Aces(KC):

1NT : 4♦/♥ : 4♥/♠ : 4NT

[Chamaco]

Gerardo, on Jun 10 2004, 09:14 PM, said:

Not playing Texas Mauro, you already have a way to Ask Aces(KC):

1NT : 4♦/♥ : 4♥/♠ : 4NT

I thought that this sequence :
1NT:4♥:4♠:4NT
would be Ace asking with 6 trumps.

Instead
1NT:2♥:2♠:4NT would be quantitative
and
1NT:2♥:2♠:4C would be Gerber ace asking with only 5 card major, unsuited for Texas (if that makes sense at all) .

[lbyer]

Re Gerber 1NT - 2♥ - 2♠ - 4♣ (or 4♦) being misinterpretd as gerber

I only use Gerber directly over 1 (or2) NT so not a problem for me. This sequence would be sensible for a mild slam try - most likely showing a long second suit but possibly cueing an A and confirming 6 (or 7) spades. As I mentioned earlier opening NT bidder can now cue bid, raise the second suit, or with a minimum stop in 4♠. Even if opening NT bids 4♠ - responder may have a bigger hand and continue with RKC.

I don't see the problem or the need/advantage of agreeing to play Texas for "mild" slam tries.

[Chamaco]

lbyer, on Jun 11 2004, 02:02 PM, said:

I only use Gerber directly over 1 (or2) NT so not a problem for me.

Sure, I think everyone has agreements.
My question is on what is supposed to be as "standard" for occasional partnerships e.g. what should I assume having just "agreed Texas" but did not iscuss all sequences.
Obviously in a usual partnership, I suppose one is free to modify meanings to their own tastes