Is this Texas?

[Chamaco]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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 B)