THE BRIDGE TABLE

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 152, 24 December 1926, Page 10

THE BRIDGE TABLE

MAJOR TENACE

(By

VOLUNTARY RAISE. The acumen of my readers frightens me sometimes. Last week I dealt with tho necessity of leading partner's suit at no-trumps; and with no other thought than this elementary lesson in my mind, I gave an instance from my own bitter exporience of game and rubber being lost because a player insisted upon opening his own suit. V and Z were partners against A and B. Z dealt and bid "one no-trumps"; A and V, "no bid"; B,""two diamonds"; Z, "two no-trumps," and all passed. V held: Spades, Q, J, 7, 4; hearts, Q, 8, 6, 3, 2; diamonds, X, 8; clubs, 5, 4. I was B, and I explained that my bid of "two diamonds" on six to the queen, jack, and the ace of hearts, was merely made to guide my partner in his initial lead. Had he taken the hint we should have saved the game, but he cho"so to lead his clubs, and we lost. It was an excellent moral lesson, illustrated with beautiful diagrams, and driven home with alternate lines of play, all carefully worked out. But it has brought down on my devoted head scores of letters, all pointing out that if only V had supported his partner properly by bidding "two no-trumps" I would never have had a chance of showing my diamonds, and Z would have had a safe game. My correspondents are right; a»d now that we have finished with Mr. Walton and Mr. Milton Work, we may well consider tho question of the voluntary raise. Some writers call the raise from "oue to two," where no intervening bid has been made, a pre-emptive raise; but this, I think, is misleading. No initial bid of "two" is pre-emptive, so why should a raise of "two" be so named? I prefer to .call these "voluntary" raises, to distinguish them from raises forced by an opposing bid; and to apply the term " pre-emptive '> raise only to unforced raises from "one" to "three," or more.

The voluntary raise is most useful at no-trumps, and its utility depreciates lvith the descending suit values, until, by the time the minors are reached, it is useless. Its drawback is that it increases tho chances of loss. Its advantages are summed up by Mr. J. ,W. F. Gillies as follows:—

1. It may prevent your opponents from showing each other their strength and perhaps going game. 2. It may prevent your opponents from pushing you into a still higher and more speculative' bid.

3. It may prevent one opponent from showing the other a lead which might be to your disadvantage. The voluntary raise of a no-trump bid is, of course, chiefly made for the third purpose—to shui out the bid of any suit by fourth in hand; and as fourth in hand must bid at least three of a suit to overcall it, and that after his partner has passed,' the voluntary raise here usually succeeds in its object. '•■

At suits the position is different. Here the raise is made with the first two advantages set out by Mr. Gillies in view—in short, to stop tho bidding up of one major suit against the other. The voluntary raise in spades is almost as effective as the no-trump raise; for there is small likelihood of "two notrumps" being bid against it—^and fourth in hand will have difficulty in calling three hearts, faced as he is by a partner who has passed. Tho voluntary raise in hearts is useless to shut out spades; but it will shut out the minor suits, and it might earn penalties.

Tho minimum strength for a voluntary raise is not generally agreed. I think,l however, it should be greater than the minimum for a forced raise; for it increases the risk of loss when there is no special . urgency. .At notrumps I would put it somewhere between the minimum for an initial bid and the minimum for a forced raise— three probable tricks distributed in three suits, partner's initial bid being taken into account in determining probability. Mr. Gillies gives the following opinion on strength for a raise at suits:—

It (the raise) should indicate that your partner's bid fits your hand; that is, that you are long in it, holding four or five. To make a preemptive raise on. general, all-round strength is unnecessary, and serves no useful purpose. Whereas, if this call is reserved for cases in which you hold length, you give your partner what may be very valuable information, which may enable

him materially and correctly to increase tho estimated valuo of his hand.

He does not distinguish, aa I have done, between the voluntary and the pre-emptive raise; and 1 think his advice more applicable to tho latter. In spades, at any rato, I would regard three to the queon, and an outside trick as sufficient strength for a bid of "two," if I were short in hearts. But I would not be in hasto. afterwards to double "three hearts" on my left, nor jvould I take any further part in the conversation; that would be calling my hand twice. The voluntary raise in hearts does not, as I have pointed out, excludo a spade bid, and I would not make it if I were short in spades. I would make it, though, if: (1) I were short in a minor suit; and (2) I had some prosspect of "setting" a contract of "three spades." My reason for the second stipulation if this: A voluntary raise is an invitation to partner to continue bidding; it is also a provocation to opponents to bid. Spades is their easiest suit, and if they yield to the provocation too far I want to double them for a big penalty.

Here is a good hand in which tb raise voluntary partner's bid of " one heart":—Spades: J, x, x, x. Hearts: Q, 10, x. Diamonds: x. Clubs: A, X, x, x, x. It holds good support in the suit bid; and three probable tricks iv the hand is played at spades—one in trumps and two in,clubs. These, with tho two quick tricks which your partner showed by his initial bid, should justify the double of "three spades" if the opponents go up to it.

The following letter has been received:—

'I desire to very warmly commend "The Post" Proprietary for instituting, and yourself for so ably conducting, the Bridge column in the Saturday evening issues. The writer is a bridge enthusiast of some little experience, and has read with much interest the matter in recent issues. For a long time we have deplored and beeii unable to explain the absence of a Bridge Club in Wellington and the general lack of organised and efficient publicity and interest in the game.

"Whilst I suppose that a large section of players are more or less dilettante in their attachment to the game, there must be a very considerable section of players whoso interest is keener and who are only awaiting the load of some one such as yourself, in inaugurating a Bridge Club which would be a centre of bridge and social. interest.

"As you are ho doubt well aware, in most centres of the Old World and U.S.A. and Canada there are clubs where players may foregather to further their development in the game of such intellectual and social pleasure as this game in a pre-eminent degree affords. Why should not Wellington have such a club? How can this great garni; really advance as it should or, indeed, hold its place without' such an organisation ?

'"You will also be aware that what is termed Duplicate Bridge (or the playing of the same card distribution at the various tables) is one development of the game which has become popular and has in itself contributed to an extraordinary advancement in the science of the game by the opportunity which it gives for comparisons and analyses of play. It provides a very fertile field for the Bridge writer and expert, and the competitive element among such a body of players conduces to improved play on the part, of all players. "The few clubs and other organisations in Wellington, wherein Bridge is played at present (as a side line) to a limited degree by some few enthusiasts you will agree, I am sure, fall far short of what is required, and the game will never be placed on the high level it should occupy by their agency. "The supporters of other forms of intellectual pastimes (notably Chess and Draughts) not in such popular favour as our own game, have their clubs and their rooms for meeting. AVith the huge body of players of our fine game to draw upon, any movement in the same direction is assured of complete success. Conjointly with the Bridge column it will create more widespread and deeper interest. I sincerely trust that we shall have the help of your able pen in advocacy of the club proposal, and I am sure tho writer will only be one of many who will rally around to get the organisation going.— I am, etc., H. C. OSMOND.