ART OF AUCTION BRIDGE

Auckland Star, Volume LVIII, Issue 195, 19 August 1927, Page 6

ART OF AUCTION BRIDGE

TAKING OUT ON TRASH.

(By A. E. MANNING FOSTER.)

One of the points which has never been settled satisfactorily is tho take-out of the No Trumper. It causes moro heart-burnings and controversies than any other matter. Players may bo divided into two classes:— (1) Thoso who announce that they like to be taken out of their No Trumper; (2) Those who positively hate it. Wi th regard to cla*s (1), they aro certainly in a minority. One wonders sometimes why they bid No Trumpß at all if they arc so anxious for their partners to tako them out. Their reply, no doubt, would bo that their No Trump bids are informatory. They announce a certain measure of strength, but may not be up to standard, and a take-out is therefore welcome. llio Class (2) players, who comprise the great majority, simply loathe being taken out on weakness. They do not object to being taken out into a long major suit, but they cannot bear being taken out into a minor suit unless it is a certain gatno-making proposition. They argue that it must be absurd on a wenk hand to raise tho contract from One No Trump to two of a suit. "If I can't make one No Trump, why should you bo ablo to mako two Clubs or two Diamonds J" That sounds logical, but, of course, it is a fallacy based, if you really come to analyse it, upon tho very human desire to play the cards when you hold the better hand. Consider the position. 7. bids "One No Trump," and Y holds no court cards above a ten, but six of a suit—uo matter how small. His hand is. in fact, "trash." It cannot be any good in No Trumps. But if he bidji that six suit and it is allowed to become trumps, he makes his hand of some value—certainly worth at least two tricks at worst, and probably a good deal more. Here is the favourite example of that forcible and picturesque writer, Miss Florence Irwin: —

'/. deals, and bids "One Xo Trump." A *"Xo bid,' \ "Two Clubs"; all |«f«, '/, cannot make tko odd trick at No 1 rumps, for the reason thai ho cannot get into Dummy to take a fincw. He is forced to lead nwgy from his own good hand up to tho enemy. At Clubs V goes piioc. \ou will, therefore, sec that thero is an argument for taking out on six of * suit—*omc writers ay even five—on an absolutely worthier* hand. But in »|iite of this example I should never recommend ouch a take-out. With a hand as bad as that of 1" nothing would induce me to speak nt all. '/. mu»t be left to play, if the opponent* allow, his Xo Trumper. , Now, why do I adopt this position in face of tho plain fact of the example given which proves how valuable thi« take-out ou trash mav bc! Hrst of all, because I consider a sinple hand proves nothing. In this particular hand you have every card lying ripht for Y's purpose.* It I would lie equally easy to give example! from plav where the take out proves disastrous. But whether a take-out from wraknes* turns out well or badly is not. in my opinion, the true test. The fatal "point about it is that it reopens the bidding. A take-out into a minor suit at love score shrieks aloud: "Partner. I have a bad hand. I am no use to you in *Xo Trumps.'" The insult is that the opponents sit up and take notice, and arc given a second Chance of bidding. In this particular example, in B'« placo I should have made an informatorv double of "Two Clubs." If bad passed. A would fhen hate culled "Two Hnarts." and B could then have rnlled "Two Xo Trump*" or left in the Heart*. Or. if 7. bad bid "Two Xo Trump**' after the doubled ( lubs, B would have had a good business double. Therefore I repeat this example proves nothing cxccpt that a minor suit may succeed if tho opponent* leave it in. My own view of the take-out from weakness is that it should be made only on a major suit of six or more, and on a minor suit of seven or more. The latter only when the hand is of such a nature that it is'most unlikelv to bo of use in Xo Trumps. I have not space to enlarge upon m'v reasons, but I believe that this view, which is the via media between those who say never take out on weakness and those who advocate always taking out on five or six is essentially sound. *