Texas, Standard or Natural?

[mw64ahw]

[hv=pc=n&w=s87h976432d6ca952&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=2n(20-21)p?]133|200[/hv]

 

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sjt52hq5dt872cq83&w=s87h976432d6ca952&n=saq63hjdkj9543ct7&e=sk94hakt8daqckj64&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=2np]399|300[/hv]

 

 

[sfi]

I choose whatever route gets partner to play 4H. At the moment we start with 3D and follow it up with 4D unless partner bids 3H, but that's not going to be standard. If you're playing normal Texas, then 4D doesn't give partner the chance to superaccept and that's the way to go.

[apollo1201]

Not aiming for 6 even if that is a lucky make here with good guessing.

 

Not planning as well to play the hand.

 

So the answers to what to bid will be system dependent.

[pescetom]

4◇ Texas, not so much to avoid a superaccept but to shut out a relatively cheap 3♤ overcall.

[mikeh]

Before considering whether slam may be good opposite a superaccept, one must also consider what may happen if partner has a good hand not good enough to superaccept.

 

When one plays Texas, one of the main benefits is that the sequence 2N 3D 3H 4H is a mild slam try, and opener is supposed to bid again with a good hand in context…say a hand that didn’t superaccept because he has only three or even occasionally two hearts (AK tight would look pretty good if the rest of the hand was also good).

 

While one may often be able to stop in 5H in those circumstances, one may not have 5 level safety.

 

So we’re not simply worried about game/slam but also worried about misleading partner if we use the 3D approach.

 

For me, this risk is enough to make me give up on 3D.

 

Note that our best contract might even be 6C! AKx Ax Axx KQxxx

 

But 3D then showing clubs is an even stronger slam move than 3D then 4D, and conceals the 6th heart, such that we may end up in a horrible mess.

 

Hamman is credited with the saying ‘don’t play me for magic cards…I don’t have them’

 

Thus I bid 4D.

 

Btw, I’m not the least bit worried about a 3S overcall should I bid 3D. If partner doubles, we’re collecting a number. If he passes, I bid 4D, re-transferring and showing the same values as I was going to show anyway (which, imo, is a little more than I actually have). If they persist to 4S, I’ll double and usually collect a number.

[Tramticket]

A simple approach is to have 4C as the transfer to hearts and 4D the transfer to spades, giving you a step in the middle for your super-accept.

 

But maybe Gerber is important to you?

[pescetom]

Btw, I’m not the least bit worried about a 3S overcall should I bid 3D. If partner doubles, we’re collecting a number. If he passes, I bid 4D, re-transferring and showing the same values as I was going to show anyway (which, imo, is a little more than I actually have). If they persist to 4S, I’ll double and usually collect a number.

 

I wouldn't be so much worried about them stringing together 8 tricks (although it can happen) but rather lead direction, say spade to AK and then opener's Q ruffed with T... maybe only happens to me.

[mikeh]

I wouldn't be so much worried about them stringing together 8 tricks (although it can happen) but rather lead direction, say spade to AK and then opener's Q ruffed with T... maybe only happens to me.

I’m surprised you risk getting out of bed in the morning!

[smerriman]

Mike covered all the reasons things could go wrong if partner doesn't superaccept.. but here even when partner superaccepts, slam is pretty hopeless, even though it makes double dummy. So there seems to be no need to even give partner a chance to do so.

[johnu]

But maybe Gerber is important to you?

 

Silly rabbit :lol: How can you claim to be playing bridge if you don't play the most important bridge convention ever invented? B-)

[AL78]

Mike covered all the reasons things could go wrong if partner doesn't superaccept.. but here even when partner superaccepts, slam is pretty hopeless, even though it makes double dummy. So there seems to be no need to even give partner a chance to do so.

 

:lol:

 

I'd challenge a world champion to find, and justify, a small club to the king followed by running the jack as a line to play the club suit for no losers.

[sfi]

I'd challenge a world champion to find, and justify, a small club to the king by running the jack as a line to play the club suit for no losers.

I was presuming North led the C10.

[steve2005]

Slam is less than 25% and East is pretty optimal.

Give East Q♣ instead of J♣ or

A♠ instead of K♠ and slam

is still at best 50%

 

going for slam as West is low percentage play

[Cyberyeti]

Slam is less than 25% and East is pretty optimal.

Give East Q♣ instead of J♣ or

A♠ instead of K♠ and slam

is still at best 50%

 

going for slam as West is low percentage play

 

Slam can be almost cold (Ax, AKQ, xxx, KQ109x and that's not even a 2N opener, AK, AKxx, xxx, KQJx) but I agree it's low percentage. I don't have texas available so would have to transfer, our breaks are a little different so I would know if partner was 3-5 in hearts and clubs with ♣KQ and at least one top heart honour, 4-4 min or 4-4 max, not sure how I'd use that information, suspect I'm signing off anyway.

[mw64ahw]

Slam can be almost cold (Ax, AKQ, xxx, KQ109x and that's not even a 2N opener, AK, AKxx, xxx, KQJx) but I agree it's low percentage. I don't have texas available so would have to transfer, our breaks are a little different so I would know if partner was 3-5 in hearts and clubs with ♣KQ and at least one top heart honour, 4-4 min or 4-4 max, not sure how I'd use that information, suspect I'm signing off anyway.

I think double dummy was showing above 60%.

 

With 10 trumps, an Ace and a singleton I would like to ask for a control count after a super-accept.

[smerriman]

I think double dummy was showing above 60%.

The hand in question shows how inappropriate double dummy is in this scenario.

[mw64ahw]

The hand in question shows how inappropriate double dummy is in this scenario.

Maybe not so inappropriate when you consider that an average 20-21 point hand has 7-8 controls and with an extra two coming from dummy you have at least ~3/4 of the total controls.

[smerriman]

Maybe not so inappropriate when you consider that an average 20-21 point hand has 7-8 controls and with an extra two coming from dummy you have at least ~3/4 of the total controls.

Studies about double dummy have shown that on average, humans do slightly better than double dummy in all cases *except* for slams, when they do worse. This is for fairly obvious reasons - the biggest gains come from suboptimal leads, which more rarely cost at higher levels. And the idea that declarer guesses balance out defender guesses doesn't apply when defenders aren't going to have the lead.

 

I forced East to have a balanced 20-21 with AKxx of trumps (surely the best case) and it was still only making slam ~40% of the time double dummy. I then looked at the first 10 of these hands manually. All 6 of the cases where it was down double dummy would be down in real life - but of the other 4, half would have gone down with normal play, which put it closer to 20%. For this specific dummy, I would expect larger datasets to show similar results, well below the levels required to bid it.

[mw64ahw]

I was presuming North led the C10.

You are correct as we were playing a Multi 2♦ making 6♥

 

J♥ was also led by North for those playing natural

[Vampyr]

A simple approach is to have 4C as the transfer to hearts and 4D the transfer to spades, giving you a step in the middle for your super-accept.

 

But maybe Gerber is important to you?

 

There are other uses for 4!C. Ours is pick a major. South African Texas is interesting, though, because it leaves 4!h and 4!s idle. Maybe for minor-suit slam tries.

[pescetom]

There are other uses for 4!C. Ours is pick a major. South African Texas is interesting, though, because it leaves 4!h and 4!s idle. Maybe for minor-suit slam tries.

Or just use 4♥ to ask for Aces B-)

 

I've never tried playing SA Texas, but if it went quickly out of fashion I imagine there is a reason.

Bidding 4♣ to show hearts offers LHO a wealth of calls to explain his hand.

[DavidKok]

There are other uses for 4!C. Ours is pick a major. South African Texas is interesting, though, because it leaves 4!h and 4!s idle. Maybe for minor-suit slam tries.

This is how I play them. The major suit transfers have an extra step for positive hands, the minor suit transfers have two extra steps (two different types of positives). With both minors we bid 3♠, so all of these are one-suiters.

[Tramticket]

Bidding 4♣ to show hearts offers LHO a wealth of calls to explain his hand.

 

After (2NT)-Pass-(4C), they might be able to double, but they could double 4D, playing Texas. The only extra call available to the opponents is 4D. Partner opened 2NT and we are often looking for slam. How often will our opponents be "explaining their hands" by bidding a suit at the four level? Good luck to them.

[pescetom]

Partner opened 2NT and we are often looking for slam.

SA is usually on after 1NT also, which is a more frequent situation than 2NT and one in which it is easier for opponents to compete.

 

The only extra call available to the opponents is 4D.

Fair enough, so they don't gain much over the SA hearts transfer.

But over the SA spades transfer they get a diamonds double rather than hearts double and they regain the natural 4♥ bid which Texas preempts.

Plus of course the opportunity for partner to double any like/dislike step bid by opener.

I've never tried playing SA transfers (or even defending them) so I'll take your word if all this is no issue in practice.

[Tramticket]

SA is usually on after 1NT also

 

Responding to 1NT is very different to 2NT. We play a weak NT and the points will often be evenly split between opener and responder. We prefer to play 1NT-4H and 1NT-4S as natural, allowing us to choose to make opener declarer (Jacoby transfer) or responder declarer (natural 4H/4S response), based on the nature of our holdings and tenaces held.