Auction and Contract Bridge

Waikato Times, Volume 114, Issue 18986, 1 July 1933, Page 18 (Supplement)

Auction and Contract Bridge

(By “ Grand Slam.";

That a Declarer with a genuine Yarborough—no card higher than a 9 —could make a grand slam seems almost impossible. But as an example of t'he marvels of distribution the following, which occurred at Auction Bridge, is Interesting:—

Bidding.—Z, "No bid”; A, "One Spade"; Y, “One No-Trump”; B, "Two Spades”; Z, "No bid”; A, “No bid"; Y, "Two No-Trumps"; B, “No bid"; Z, "Three Hearts"; A, "No bid"; Y, "No bid"; B, "No bid.” A led the King of Spades and Z mado a grand slam. Y took the first triok with the Ace of Spades and Z discarded the 2 of Clubs. Then two rounds 'of trumps followed by a small Spade ruffed by Z and a Diamond led through A. As a perfeot fit this combination requires a lot of beating. I know many players would refuse persistently to bid on Z’s cards at all. But, without judging by results, Z was, of course, quite right to bid “ Three Hearts " after Y had called " Two No-Trumps.” . You will notice that after B’s bid of “ Two Spades,” Z did not call at all.. He waited until Y had re-bid his “ No-Trumps ” and then made his bid. This is am important point not always realised by players. If Z had bid "Three Hearts" voluntarily on the first round, Y would have been entitled to place him with greater strength than he held. By deferring his bid Z gave his partner the most acourate information. His pass had already announced that he had no help in “ No-Trumps." Later, by taking out, he emphasised further his dislike of “ Two No-Trumps,’-’ and indicated he had length in Hearts. Z correctly interpreted the bid and left it alone. Funny things happen at Bridge, and the insufficient bid is a terror at Contract. The following occurred

GRAND SLAM WITH A YARBOROUGH.

Score: Y Z game and 60; A B nil

Y dealt and bid “One Club”; B, “No bid ’’; Z, " Two Spades "; A, “No bid”; Y, “No bid”; B, "Three Hearts”; Z, “Four Hearts"; A, "No bid”; Y, “Three Spades"! B said to Y, “ You have made an insufficient bid. - I close the bidding at Four Heart’s." Imagine the feelings of Z, who says he has never had a more nerve-racking moment. But A led agjHeart, and Z actually made his contract, losing only two tricks in Hearts and one in Spades. It does show, doesn’t it, what may happen? Ail the same, I do not approve of the bidding. Z's bid of “ Four Hearts ” over B’s “ Three ” was a slam invitation, and he had not sufficient material for such an invitation. The bidding of opponent’s suit is a tricky affair and should not, in my opinion, be made with four of the suit, but only when holding Ace bare or King, Queen, or when void. Instead of bidding “ Four Hearts ’’ over B’s “ Three," Z should have called “ Four" or even " Five Clubs," in which suit the game should have been played. It is not often that an insufficient bid has such a happy consummation for the offender.

GRAND BLAM BIDS AT BRIDGE.

MR CULBERTSON’S NEW SYSTEM. Grand Slam bids at Contract Bridge are given particular attention in the 1933 version of the Culbertson system of bidding. Mr Culbertson and his associates have devised four and five No-Trump conventions for arriving at safe grand slam bids which the new international code has rendered such rich prizes. After one partner has forced the other, a bid of four No-Trumps shows two aces and a king of one of the suits bid. An answer of five NoTrumps shows the other two aces. A direct bid of five No-Trumps without an intervening bid of four No-trumps means that the bidder has three aces and the king of one of the suits bid by his partner. “ Under the old sepring," Mr Culbertson said, “ anyone' who would bid a grand slam on almost any hand was well nigh fit for the booby hatoh. Today, anyone who falls to bid a grand slam, even on a finesse, ought to take a buggy ride to the booby hatch.” So far as expert play is concerned, Mr Culbertson says he believes his 1933 system is good for at least ten years without revision. He has designed it " to make average players experts."