CONTRACT BRIDGE

Southland Times, Issue 25359, 10 August 1935, Page 11

CONTRACT BRIDGE

From The British Ranks

Captain Ewart Kempson is one of Britain’s best Contract Bridge, players and in “Kempson on Contract,” he reveals the fact that he is aware of it. In this he is no different from the bulk of the Contract experts who write. On the other hand he enjoys one advantage over most of his peers: he recognizes the merits of his opponents without using their virtues to enhance his own. He possesses, too, a keen sense of humour, which pops out in various guises and in various places, at times rising to the salty heights of wit. Captain Kempson is a stalwart of “British”, Bridge, but while he calls a curse on the, complexities of bidding systems built on conventions and mathematical formulae, he will not go the full length with Colonel Walter Buller and say that bidding at Contract can be conducted without any system at all. He is an advocate of a “common sense system,” which has conventions, but these are likened to the “common sense signals of a motorist.” He cites the bidding of an opponent’s suit as a conventional bid which can be understood as informative by anyone of common sense, and so it is included as a bid with a meaning similar to that given it by Ely Culbertson and Hal P. Sims in their systems, to s-y nothing of a dozen others with variants of the Approach-Forcing or completely artificial bidding. „Captain Kempson argues that a “two” bid should always mean more than a “one ’ and a “three” should mean more than a. “two”; but if we go back to Auction we will find that the pre-emptive bid was employed then to shut out as a means of preventing the opposing side from entering the bidding and, through the establishment of communication, securing the contract. This was necessary when one’s hand had its strength concentrated in one suit, but it was not necessary when the strength was distributed and was sufficient to justify the belief that if the opponents did secure the contract it would be held short of game or defeated. Bidding for the concealment of strength is a part of any card game containing the auction principle, and it must be remembered that Captain Kempson s argument demands, too, that a bid of “one” shall always mean more than a pass—when actually a pass may be a concealment of strength necessary to help bringing about the discomfiture of the enemy. He argues that British Bridge is preferable because it is best, but so far it must be admitted, the British players have not achieved a run of victories over Americans using the approach-Forcing system to justify his claim of superiority. But even if you are not vitally interested in the war of the systems, you will enjoy Captain Kempson’s book for its brightness, and its collection of stories. The one about Colonel G. G. J. Welshe and his weakness of sleepiness about midnight is a gem. In these pages he talks on various aspects of bidding and play, in a lucid manner, and as he is invariably breezy the lessons are as entertaining as the excellent thumb-nail sketches of prominent players, British and American. There is an excellent chapter on “Defences,” which should be widely read, because it is in the defensive play that the real skill of the player is revealed. Anyone can play good cards; it is when you have to make use of cards that are not quite good enough that skill must take a hand. Captain Kempson is a skilled player, an excellent fellow and an attractive writer. What more could you hope for in a book on Contract? “Kempson on Contract,” by Captain Ewart Kempson (Messrs Hodder and Stoughton Ltd., London).