Complicated systems affect play. Test match troubles in Auckland

Press, 14 June 1983, Page 16

Complicated systems affect play. Test match troubles in Auckland

The victory over Australia by 263 international match points to 234 Over 120 boards in the Test match last month can give considerable satisfaction to New Zealand bridge players. However, by many accounts, the standard of play left much to be desired.

In part, no doubt this was due to the occasion, but it seems likely that the complicated systems used by the contestants were at least a contributing factor. In both teams two of the partnerships were playing systems that demanded opening bids on substantially lower high card strength than is normally accepted.

Typically all hands of 0-7 points were opened with one heart or one spade irrespective of the holding in the suit. No matter what claims are made for the system, in practice it is a little like throwing a grenade into the air io see where it lands.

The methods were devised, of course, to counter the increased accuracy achieved by modern relay systems, the theory being to strike the first blow and to make them guess. This is all very well if the opponents do in fact have the balance of power, but it can also be a two-edged sword.

Without going into too much detail, if an opening bid of one heart shows less than eight points then a pass must show more. At this stage, one is wide open to opposing disruptive tactics. This hand from the Test illustrates just what might happen. East was the dealer with neither side vulnerable:

It is wildly improbable that either of the' two auctions would be reproduced at the family bridge table. First let us look at the happenings when Australia held the East-West cards: W. N. E. S. No 4V Dble All Pass Holding 13 high card Eoints, East was constrained y his system to pass, and now a flaw was cruelly exposed when South elected to make a full-blooded preemptive opening bid of four hearts. With a view of all four hands, everyone later was convinced that West should have called four spades, but at the table it was not quite so clear. Knowing that his side had the balance of the high cards, West decided to double for penalties, and everyone passed. Having won the first trick with the king of diamonds, West continued the suit and South ruffed. The king of

hearts was taken by the ace, and another diamond was trumped by the declarer. After drawing East’s jack of hearts with the queen, South crossed to dummy’s ace of spades. Now a club was led to the five,, queen and . three. The ace of clubs dropped the king and the declarer led a small club to the jack. That was the third and final defensive trick as South’s hand now consisted of two high trumps and two established clubs, so the doubled game contract had been duly made. That was a score of 590 to New Zealand. At the other table, Australia held the North-South cards: W. N. E. S. - IV 2T 4* No No 5* 5f 5V No No s<i> All pass B. R. Anderson and R. P. Kerr for New Zealand quickly demonstrated that by and large it pays to show the suits one holds. Playing a “submarine” system, East opened one heart to show spades. South’s two heart overcall was natural, over which West jumped to four spades. As we shall see, 10 tricks would have been easy, but when this was passed round to him the Australian South did very well to push on with five clubs. Though at this stage his -opponents were already one level too high, it was rather difficult for West to judge, so eventually he pushed on to five spades. When North started the defence with a low club, this contract never had a chance. South quickly made the ace and queen of clubs and a little later the ace of spades defeated West by one trick. Even so this was a mere 50 to Australia and profit of 540 to the home side, well-deserved in the opinion of many spectators.