CONTRACT BRIDGE.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 134, 9 June 1933, Page 6

CONTRACT BRIDGE.

THE GREATEST PASS IN HISTORY.

(By ELY CULBERTSON.) This lg the ninth of a series of articles by Mr. Culbertson, dealing with the additions and refinements made necessary in Contract bidding by the new scoring. This is a tale of how a masterful mind can reconstruct from a single bid his partner's entire hand with such uncanny precision that out of millions of possible hands this is the only hand that partner could hold, assuming that his bid is correct. The bidding and the hand actually occurred (with slight modifications) in the first AngloAmerican match, in wliicli the United States team-of-four, captained by the writer, played against two selected English teams. The master mind was nay favourite man partner, Mr. Theodore A. Lightner. One bid, made by me, was the only clue that led him to a series of brilliant inferences, aud eventually culminated in the reconstruction of my entire hand. The bidding was: Both sides vulnerable. Opponents do not" bid. Mr. Lightner (dealer), "One Spade." The author, "Five Hearts!" llf. Lightner, "Pass!" Mr. Lightner held: Spades, A K Q J 5 2; Hearts, J; Diamonds, K Q 2; Clubs, K J 10. A five-Heart bid is a mighty urgent invitation to bid a slam—practically a royal command, in fact. Is there a hero on the face of this earth who would have declined to bid six Hearts, especially when it is remembered that three honour triclcs is the minimum I had a logical right to expect in Mr. Lightner's hand, and that he actually held four honour tricks, not to count his solid Spade suit? Obviously, only a beginner or a master mind could havo passed with, such a hand! My five-Heart bid involved no special convention—in fact, such a bidding situation had never before occurred in our partnership game. But I trusted that my partner (and there is only one other in the world whom I could have trusted as much) would rise to the unusual occasion and reason the hand out. This is how he did it. Step One.—Why this startling five-Heart bid? Was there "another and more scientific bid? Decidedly, yes! A forcing take-out of three Hearts would guarantee that the bidding be kept open, and "at the same time it would offer the tremendous advantage of securing, while the bidding was still low, added information from my (Lightner's) responses. Step Two. —This fellow Culbertson either has E'one temporarily insane or has something startlingly unusual up his sleeve and is trying to signal and warn me. Why didn't he make a

forcing three-Heart bid ? Step Three. —The only reason is that he does not hrtvo at least honour tricks, and, since he bid only five Hearts, he obviously feared to mislead me into contracting for a losing slam bid. Therefore, he has no outside trick. Step Four.—A five-Heart bid strongly invites partner to bid six. Culbertson, therefore, practically guarantees eleven tricks for combined hands. It would be ridiculous to invite me (Lightner) to bid six and not even he able to guarantee a five contract should I decline the invitation. In order to guarantee eleven tricks (flvc-odd) for the combined hands, Culbertson cannot expect more than two sure winners in my hand. It is true that I should have 2J honour tricks, but the third trick is merely a probability and not a reasonable certainty. Therefore, Culbertson has at least nine tricks—nine sure winners in his hand. Step Five.—Tf Culbertson guarantees nine tricks and at the same time has no outside trick, he can have nothing else than: Spades ?; Hearts, A K Q 8 7 6 5 4 3; Diamonds ?; Clubs ? He cannot hold Spades ?; Hearts, K Q 10 8 7 (5 5 4 3 2; Diamonds ?; Clubs ?; because a slam invitation without an Ace is quite risky. Tbo climax is * now reached with dramatic suddenness and precision. Step Six.—The next problem is to place the

remaining four cards. Culbertson must have at least one, and very probably two. Spades. With a void in partner's bid suit it would be highly dangerous to invite' a slam. There remain but two cards for Clubs and Diamonds, and here again the inference is strong that Culbertson holds a small Diamond and a small Club. If Culbertson held 2-0 he should have bid a direct slam, for then his chances would have been better than even for a successful slam, since

opponents arr* more likely to lead a suit of which he has a void. , • ■ It follows that Culbertson'p hand, when reconstructed, must be: Spades. 0 3; Hearts, A K Q Iff 3 M 5 4; Diamonds, 7; Clubs 6. 'Step Seven. —It follows that at least two outstanding Aces, in Diamonds and Clubs, are not only held by opponents, but in all probability they will win! Conclusion. —-That was the hand that the author actually held. A hand of this type had never before occurred in our partnership game, and, frankly, I was quite stumped how to bid it. I had too many losers for a direct small slam bid, and had I "made a forcing three-Heart takeout I would .have conveyed to Mr. Lightner the very inference that I tried to avoid, to.wit: that I had some outside strength. I therefore had no other way but to "create" a new bid, trusting that my brilliant partner would be able to interpret it. And that was why Mr. Lightner passe;?, and by so doing made the greatest pass in the history of bridge. Playing a la papa, a la mama, a small slam bid and a penalty of one trick were inevitable.