THE BRIDGE TABLE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20472, 25 January 1930, Page 5 (Supplement)

THE BRIDGE TABLE.

NO JJRUMPB IN CONTRACT.

BY MAJOR TENACE.

I promised last week to discuss the various contract conventions in .use and to select the one that fulfils the 'peculiar needs of contract bidding most simply. This appears at first sight to bo an impossible task, but I propose to bring it within reasonable limits by accepting a lesson which we should all have learned in the, early days of auction. Anyone whose memory carries back to the time when the old bridge suit values were applied to auction, and later when an effort was being made to improve things by giving spades two values, will readily recall the multitude of conventions that sprang up. Some of them were marvels of ingenuity, giving a wealth of exact information with little or nt> risk. Why did Llioy not receive more support from the general run of players? I will ,put tho answer quite bluntly. All these conventions called upon players occasionally to make bids which tney could not possibly fulfil, and the averago player considered this course dishonest and refused to have anything to do with it. The proof of this is demonstrated beyond all doubt by the fact that though auction has been the most popular card game for nearly twenty years and though repeated efforts have been made during that time to establish conventions which violate tho obvious meaning of a bid as an offer to fulfil a contract, only one sucli convention —the informatory double—has gained anything like general acceptance, and that only after years of struggle and the combined advocacy of all writers of repute. " Dishonest" Bids. The inventors of contract conventions have completely ignored this lesson, and have started again tho dreary round of calling on players to bid one diamond or even two diamonds, though they havo not a single diamond in their hands, just as though the old controversy had never been. This is not exaggeration. No sooner had the popularity of contract begun in tho United States (its most ardent advocates cannot say that it has yet begun to be popular in Britain) players were urged to make an initial bid of two diamonds, not to proclaim their willingness to get game in diamonds, but to show strength in both spades and hearts. lam not suggesting for a moment that such a convention is dishonest; provided it is clearly understood by all four players, it is not dishonest. But the fact remains that the averago player thinks it is dishonest, and that is all that • matters.

I propose, therefore, to leave on one side all the conventions that honest " bids. This rules out the Vanderbilt convention, tho ace-showing slam convention," the uso of minor bids to show two-suiters, and a host of others. It brings us down, in fact, to the mere fixing of the minimum strength required for any bid. It may be contended that this not a convention at all. It is. A convention is an understanding; and if a player makes a bid to show two quick tricks' and his partner and opponents know that this is the meaning of the bid, lie is employing a convention simpler m degree, but similar in kind, to the informatory double. ~ , , u Having arrived at this, let us see how much more strength is required to bid two initially than to bid one; and since no one method of card valuation is suitable for both no trump and trump suit bids, we must consider the two separately. Ihe minimum strength for an initial bid of one no trump is expressed in many ways, but it amounts in practice to a queen above average strength and protection in l at least three suits. In recent years a further requirement has been established—that any unprotected suit should have at least three cards. This is intended to minimise the risk of second hand with the initial lead running down a long suit which the no trump declarer cannot stop.

The Unprotected Suit

I do not insist too rigidly upon the latter requirement for a bid of one no trump. I would rather bid one no trump than one diamond initially, at either auction or contract, on such a hand, for example as the following Spades, AQ 3; hearts, KQ9; diamonds, AKJ62; clubs, 85. But the requirement, I think, should bo rigidly observed in calling two no trumps initially. Some players, go further and refuse to bid two no trumps initially unless they have protection in all four suits. Too much caution at bridge,

however, is like too much cover in insurance, and results in a steady loss. This is easily demonstrated. When a player bids one no trump he proclaims a hand above the average strength, with which, given normal support, he can win the odd trick. This is valuable information, for it shows that he is in a position to attack. But if this is all tho information the initial bidder can give, partner will not raise him unless his own hand warrants him in thinking that ho can get game or slam. If the initial bidder,, therefore, merely shows minimum attacking strength, when, he has a hand which just falls short of game-giving strength, he risks missing the game contract if he does not inform his partner that very little is required of him in order to get game.

The Initial Bid ol Two.

It is an old axiom that a no trumper

is no stronger than its weakest suit; but when the length of this suit is such as to make it improbable that either opponent has great length in it, and when the strength in the other suits is so great that unless partner holds a Yarborough, be must have some sort of protection in that suit, I think this weakness can be risked. As in initial bids of one, though! if one suit is unprotected, the other three suits should bo correspondingly stronger. Tho total strength for an initial bid of two no trumps is not difficult to determine. It is such strength as will warrant him in. supposing that if his partner can supply little more than normal support, he can fulfil a game contract. Stated in the same terms as I used for defining the minimum strength for an initial bid of one, it is an ace above average strength, if all four suits are protected. I give two hands as examples: (1) Spades, AQ10; hearts, AQ6.3; diamonds, 'A K 10; clubs, 73 2.(2) Spades, KQ 6; hearts, AKS; diamonds. JlO 73; clubs, KlO 5. Comparison of these two hands will show the greater strength required for making an initial bid of two when one suit is unprotected, than I when all four suits aro guarded.