AUCTION BRIDGE

Evening Star, Issue 18051, 19 August 1922, Page 11

AUCTION BRIDGE

[Specially Written by Ernest Berghow for the ‘Evening Star.’] ' No~XV. MR DALTON’S EIGHTH EDITION. I have had a letter from a gentleman who signs himself “Bonfleot,” he says: "Srixely you_ are doing Dalton an injustice in supposing that when he advocates minor suit, declarations ‘ almost regardless of the number of cards’ in tho suit declared ho is thinking of hands such as Mr R. F. Foster and 'Engineer’ would declare upon. Tho passage which you cite from page 14 of his book seems conclusive upon this point. If it is necessary for the declarer to hold ‘ a hand above the average,’ is it not clear that hands would be excluded such as those which you havo very' rightly reprobated? I cannot believe that Mr Dalton, for instance, would recommend tho call of ono Diamond or ono Club upon any ono of the three following hands: Hearts, 7,4, 3; Clubs, K, J, 9,7; monds, Q, 10, 6; Spades, K, 4, Si Hearts, 7,4, 5; Clubs, K,'B, 7,2; Diamonds, A, K, 5; Spades, 9,3, 2. Hearts, 8,6; Club's, A. K, 3; Diamonds, 8,4, 3,2; Spades, 9,7, 6, 3. Because it is evident that not one of these hands is even ns good as (let alone better than) an average holding.” It seems to me, I confess, that there is a-great deal of force in this argument, and if 1 have really misinterpreted Mr Dalton, and have wrongly confounded his views with those of other writers, I can only hasten to express my reg-rot. AATiat is quite certain, however, is that Dr Gillies puls forward all three of. the above hands as excellent initial bids, and that Mr R. F. Foster and his school would bid unhesitatingly upon tho last two of them. I have, in fact, dealt at considerable length with the theoretical reasoning by which the soundness,of suck declarations is supposed to havo been “ demonstrated.” It may bo that Air Dalton’s advice is only intended to apply to suits of_ four, headed by aco and king, or to suits of three consisting of ace, king, queen, supported in either case by such cards in tho other suits as will bring the whole hand, up to a littlo mono than average strength: Hearts, Q. 5; Clubs, A, K, 7,3; Diamonds, 10, 9,2; Spades, Q, J, 8, 4. Hearts, 9,6, 4; Clubs, J, 10, 7,3; Diamonds, A, K, Q; Spades, J, 8, 4. If this be so, the aspect of affairs is entirely altered, and it would be impossible, I think, for any candid critic to say with complete confidence that one, Club or one Diamond respectively is a positively wrong call on tho two hands given above. Nevertheless, I look upon them with considerable suspicion. They appear to me to be admirable supporting hands for a declaration made by a partner, and excellent defensive hands against a declaration made by an opponent; but I am averse to offering assistance before it has been asked for. I hold that t/ne most prudent way of standing on tho defensive is to keep silence until you know exactly what kind of an attack is going to be launched upon you. and from what quar'ter. The advice, in short, that I should tender is to proclaim your strength fearlessly if you have an attacking hand capable* of carrying-what yon undertake to a successful conclusion; but, jn ether cases, to lie low and say nothing until someone else has taken the initiative. It rather looks to me as if, m Mr Dalton’s latest edition, ho is endeavoring to put old wine into now bottles. Ho perceives that Mr R. F. Foster’s theories become untenable when earned to their logical conclusion—as Air Foster himself carries them. I do net for a moment think, for example, that Dalton would; assert (as Foster docs) that the correct initial call on the following hand is one Glub: Hearts, 9; Clubs, A, K, 1, o; Diamonds, J, 9; Spades, K, J. 10. 4 . 3 - What Foster says is this;— , “ Tho number of cards in a minor suit is unimportant. .•• Length ,* rMer a detriment than a help in mmol suits, unless they are solid and accompanied by an Ace Then they are No-trumpers.’ (‘Foster on Auction,’ p. 76: for the italics lam responsible.) But Dalton shows ■ tendency to hedge. "Experience has taimht me that it pays to show top strength in a minor suit, almost regardless of the number of cards in it. ( Koval Auction Bridge,’ p. 21; again the italics a ln m p!)int of fact, Dalton has explicitly repudiated some of Foster’s minor suit theories. On the occasion of_ ns having been recently quoted, in the bridge column of a Sunday newspaper, “ as advocating an original call on Ace, King, and a small one in a minor suit,’’ he wrote to me saving • “I never did'anything of the kind; but I do say that an original_ bid in a minor suit on A. K, Q is a very useful call and an infinitely better one than on five' to the King, which many players habitually call on.” . With such a rational statement as tins I am not disposed to quarrel The examples which ho sets out are as follow: Hearts, Q, 10, 3; Clubs, A, K, Q; Diamonds. 9,5, 4; Spades, 10, 7,4, 2. Hearts, 9,5; Clubs, 9,8, 6,4; Diamonds, K, Q, 10, 2; Spades, A, 7,2. P 22. The former hand (“ One Club”) is up to average strength, and the latter One Diamond”) is very nearly so. It is explained that such a declaration “ is made with the object df giving information to tho partner” (p. 22), but is it right to sav (as is said on p. 23) that this informatory” system is the characteristic of a “ newer school who believe in showing winning cards on the earliest opportunity, ’ as opposed to an “ old school who will never make a declaration as dealer except on real strength”? , In a book by “ Hellespont, dated 1910 (when the count was 2,4, 6,8, 12, and “Royal Spades” wore still in the womb of futurity), I find the following hands set our as models for a “One Club”: Hearts, A, 5,4; Clubs, K, J, 10, 2; Diamonds, 10, 9,8; Spades, Q, 10, 3. Hearts, K. Q. 2; Clubs, A, 8,3; Diamonds, Q, 10, 6; Spades, J, 6,5, 4. “ The information you wish to convey to your partner,” wo are told, “is that you can give him assistance to the extent of at least three tricks, if his hand is such that he wishes to bid ono No-trump upon it.” (‘ Saturday Auction Bridge,’ p. 63.) Here wo “fall out of the attacking ranks, and enter- a less aggressive sphere. . . . AVe offer our services as allies for a joint assault.” (lb, p. 62.) There is, therefore, nothing of a “ now school ” about tho system. On the contrary', it is a reversion to those very doctrines of the. “ old school” which Air Dalton himself, in his earlier editions, told us had been swept away by tho modern count. Even on page 15 of his latest edition we still read : “If the dealer makes a call at all it must bo an independent call on the strength of his own hand, and that call should be ono on which he is prepared to play the hand with a reasonable expectation of winning the odd trick at least.”