CONTRACT BRIDGE Trouble in Bermuda

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33775, 22 February 1975, Page 7

CONTRACT BRIDGE Trouble in Bermuda

(By

J.R.W.)

There has never been a I Bermuda Bowl contest like it. The venue for the silver jubilee of the world bridge championship was Bermuda, the island where 25 years ago the contest began. Sadly, despite two years of preparation and hard work by the Bermudians and some splendid hospitality, the prevailing impression left was one of animosity. The trouble began in the ’middle of 1974 when Alfred

Sheinwold wrote an article implying very strongly that the Italian world champions ■ could not win without a little cheating. European bridge players took strong exception to this, and their annoyance was intensified when Sheinwold was appointed captain of the North American team.

The European Bridge League went so far as to ask its American counterpart to reconsider the appointment, but not surprisingly the request was politely turned down. Even before the teams conigregated at Bermuda, Taiwan [formally asked the Far East Bridge Federation and the | World Bridge Federation to look into the bidding and [opening leads of one of the Indonesian pairs. Since the players in question have been under suspicion before, it was perhaps as well from all points of view that the

.World Bridge Federation appointed a sub-committee to investigate the matter. When the five teams, the ■ champions of their respective zones, finally got around to playing bridge, they found that bidding screens were to ; be used in all matches. Before ! each deal, a screen was ! i placed diagonally across the > table, so that the players could see only one opponent .land not their partner. I They made their bids by : delving into a box that con- : tained printed cards for ; every conceivable action and • selecting the one they i wanted. When the two players i on one side of the screen i had made their bids in this • way, a monitor called them i out for the benefit of the . other two.

Thus the players were able : to consider their actions at length, freed from the thought that any hesitation would subconsciously influence their partner. More important, they did not have any nagging suspicions that their opponents' were transmitting information by their hesitations or mannerisms. When the auction was over and the opening lead had been made, the screen was removed and play proceeded as usual. i It sounded too good to be true, and it was. The first [session of 32 boards took six [hours — almost 12 minutes per hand — and the second session was even longer, six, hours 20 minutes. Soon a i flaw in the scheme of things i appeared. I When a player made a i conventional call, he had to [alert the opponent he could [see. and if requested explain its meaning in writing. When the auction came round to the other side of the screen, his partner similarly explained the meaning to the other opponent. This was fine as long as both parties remembered the system, but even at the world championship level misunderstandings are not unknown. Three times in the first two days the appeals committee had to meet to rule on cases where the opponents had each been given widely differing interpretations of a particular call. Then, after three matches, came one of the most sensational incidents in the history i of international bridge. The American monitors reported to the tournament committee

| that one of the Italian pairs I had been shuffling tl ir f et and kicking their par: ,er [during the auction. i After hearing hat was I described as '.oluminous testimony the W irld Bridge Federation “sen rely reprimanded” the Ltal .his in question, a s iterr -nt that was subseque- ly < irified by a corollary tat the pair I was guilty < iy ; improper conduct at the table. No other findings were made.” After this incident foot blocks were installed underneath the tables, so that it was impossible for the players to touch their partner’s feet. It sounds incredible, but it is true.

After three days of tension allegation and insinuation, even the mercurial Giorgio Belladonna, a veteran of some 15 world championships, had had enough and cried off for one match, an almost unheard of occurrence. But he was back on top form when Italy played the U.S.A, in a preliminary to the finals. He was West on this deal:—

The auction at his table was:— W. N. E. S. No No 1 * Dble Redble 2* Dble No 4* All Pass

Belladonna, sensing that South might be able to make a lot of tricks by crossruffing, chose as his opening lead the deuce of spades. The declarer after winning with the jack in hand continued with the king of hearts taken by West’s ace. Now put yourself in Belladona’s place. What is your best chance to beat the contract? Giorgio found it. He switched smoothly to the seven of diamonds. South, unable to believe his opponent had dared lead away from the ace and king, played low from dummy, even as you and I would do. After all, he would have been right had West held the diamond jack. But East, to his surprise, won the trick with the jack of diamonds after which it was not too hard for him to return the suit for his partner to make the ace and king. That was one down, and a score of 100 to Italy. When the board was replayed with the Italian pair in the other room as NorthSouth, the defence was not nearly so inspired. South duly finished in four spades but West doubled and led the king of clubs. The declarer eventually made an overtrick when the defence declined to cash its three top winners.