THE GAME OF BRIDGE CALL OUT OF TURN

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 145, 16 December 1933, Page 19

THE GAME OF BRIDGE

CALL OUT OF TURN

INSUFFICIENT BID

Tho rules relating to a call out of turn, and to an insufficient bid are somewhat complicated. A study of the explanations given below may prove helpful to those players who find these rules difficul.t to apply. A call out of turn.—For a pass out of turn before any bid has been made, there is no penalty. If a' player makes a call other than a pass, when it is the turn of either his partner or the opponent on his left to call, that opponent, may, if he wishes, claim a new deal. If he allows the deal to stand, the bidding proceeds as if the out of turn bid had not been made. Suppose it. is Souths deal, and East, out of turn, bids one heart. South (being the opponent on the left) may either claim a new deal, or allow ' the deal to stand, just as suits him best. If lie allows the deal to stand (as he may wish to do with a really strong hand), the bidding proceeds as though East had not spoken. It may.suit South very well to . know where the adverse strength lies before making a bid, and he has the option of throwing in the hand if that course suits" him. If a player makes a call other than a pass when it is the turn of the opponent on his right to call, the auction revertsto that opponent, and the bidding proceeds as though the out of turn call had not been made, until it reaches the offender's 'partner, who must pass on that round of bidding, but in the event of further bidding, may bid on the next round. ' Suppose it is Souths deal, and West out of turn bids one heart. In this ease South may not claim a new deal, but the auction reverts to him and he calls one spade. West may now either bid or pass. South'a partner will also bid or pass in the ordinary way, but West's partner must not speak on that round of the bidding. Insufficient bid.—lf a player makes an underbid of the preceding bid, and fails to correct it before attention has been called to the error, he is required to make a bid which overcalls the preceding bid. He is not bound to keep the call in the suit, or possibly the notrump in which he made the underbid. He may amend his bid in any denomination he chooses. For instance,'suppose South, calls one spade, West overcalls with two hearts, and North underbids with two diamonds. North must amend his bid so that it overcalls West{s two heart bid. He may'bid two spades, two no-trumps, three clubs, or three diamonds. The penalty for the underbid is that his partner is debarred from speaking when next it is hi 3 turn to call. . If, after making an insufficient bid, a player immediately rectifies his mistake by calling the requisite number of tricks to overcall, before attention has been drawn to the underbid; there is no penalty. If the player on tho offender's left makes a, call or passes before attention has been called to an underbid, there is no penalty. This "Convention Argument."—The following extract is taken from an article in the November number of v the "British Bridge World," under the above heading. "Since the bidding at contract forms such an interesting

Weekly Chat on Contract Specially Written for "The Post" by "Approach Bid"

study in suit and card placing, and .is admittedly the most important feature of the game, it is perhaps natural that there should be a good deal of controversy regarding the merits of different bidding methods. It is, however, rather difficult to follow the reasoning of a certain section of players who condema anything in the nature of a systematic attempt to make easy the bidding problems which confront not only the average player but often even the ex« pert. These critics (and it is signifi-i cant that the finest exponents of Contract in this country are not numbered, amongst them) contend that the use of any convention or system • of bidding which may help two partners to form a very accurate estimate of their combined hands is bad for the game, unfair, and unsportsmanlike. . . . This attitude of the non-convention brigade is: the more difficult to reconcile When one considers that they must, if they are even fairly good players, make use of several conventions every time they sit down to a game of bridge. . . . The calling, even in 'auction, is based on definite standards which are so generally; known and accepted as'to be almost conventional. . . . Bidding according to> some recognised system does not, as is sometimes suggested by the uninformed, make for stereotyped and mechanical calling. An examination of the records of any duplicate niatch in which all the players are about equal and profess touse the same system—quite a usual stater of affairs—will reveal the fact that comparatively few hands are played in the, same declaration, and only a few of those declarations-are reached, through the same bidding. The human, factor, of necessity, enters largely into Contract, and this, especially among good players, will always prevent the game becoming mechanical." .The Four-five No-trump convention, is coming in for a good deal of criticism by opponents of the Culbertson. system at Home. The contention has recently been made in the English. Press that the convention is illegal. The reason given is that the convention offends against the rule which states that a card is exposed if "during theauction or play, a player has said anything indicating thajt he holds it." The penalty for exposing a card during the Auction is a fresh deal at the option, of the opponents. \ It is difficult to understand -why the Four-five No-trump convention should be considered to be illegal. A careful perusal of the 1932 Contract Bridge Rules fails to reveal anything that calls into question thedegality of the convention. Under the heading, the "Proprieties of the Game," No. viii, a player is warned against "Giving by word, manner, or gesture any indication of the nature of the hand held by. him." If the Four-five No-trump convention is atacked under this heading (the only, law that could possibly apply), the other informatory conventions must be included—the take-out double, tho forcing take-out, tho opening two-bid, etc. Opportunities for slam bidding do not occur very frequently,'anct the convention being forcing, calls at times for very nice judgment as to the final bid, and adds great interest to the bidding.