The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-02-14
PUZZLE OF SPADES
AT ROYAL AUCTION
Some Players Who Have Tried
the No Bid Rule Don't
Like 1t.
AIMS OF THE REF0RMERS

AS letters continue to come to THE
Sun expressing opinions about the pro-
posed mo bid" rule at auction and
giving experiences with 1t. one point
seems particularly prominent. This
point is that at first the novelty OF the
new game is attractive and the players
like 1t. hut that I'm a short time the
novelty wears on and there comes
feeling OF crampeGenss in certain stua-
tions. making tie player wish he were
free to return to the old system with
spades at TWO trick.
Some correspondents like the idea OF
a double value for all the suits. the
lower to be protected by a penalty limit
II IL IL an original bid. Their idea is
that there should be a penalty limit on
any bid that cannot go game from zero
one correspondent in Atlanta even sug-
gcsts that there should be a penalty
limit on tentative no trumpers. so as to
smoke out the players that lie In wait
for them with a big suit and the lead
None of these schemes is practical
however, as they would unnecessarily
complicate the suit values. and instead
OF simplifying the game 1t would be
necessary to have printed schedule Of
bids on the table, something like the
b Avondale schedule at five hundred, or a
table OF payments mt boston.
The only sensible idea seems to he
TO abolish the penalty limit and the com
pulsory bid, and let the rest stand
Then one spade would mean one spade.
Just as one diamond or one club means
one trick IN the suit named There
would then be no necessity for the dealer
to hold tricks outside spades in order to
show the tricks In spades. as he does
now when he bids two. and puts him
self outside the protection limit at the
same time, although he can never 20
game at spades.
This leads some to ask why not
abolish the royals? That bid is the
real eXcrescence on the game. Those
who complain about the double value of
! the suit seem to forget that the nine is
the added value not the two
The answer 10 this is that all four
suits are wanted in the game-going
possibilities of q hand. The objection
20 the old count was that there were
three suits that We're not worth play
ing. The new count brought all the
suits within reach of game from zero
IT has been the aim Of the reform,rs
20 get the suits closer together and to
cut out the spade at two because II was
50 seldom played except At loss.
This simply leads us back to the
suggestion made last week. why not
give all the suits equal game going
possibilities by making their PLAYING
value the same If three by cards or
f1ur by cards is 20 be game why not
. let the player win the game who can
make four odd at anything? II that
dee. not bring the suits close together
what does
Eliminate the meaningless one spade
by eliminating the compulsory bid and
you eliminate tho objections upOn which
the whole scheme of change Is based; tho
unfair use Of the spade suit in private
conventions. The opinions held by the
governors OF the leading clubs in New
York agree on this point, namely, the
unsportsma mike nature of shade bids
that are Intended to Indicate the play
er's holding in hearts. or his chances
at no trump. As long as the player
names the suit In which his greatest
strength lies there can be no objections
10 10. The limit should be set by law
AT two spades That is enough for
honest players. II We can make laws
whcs compel a player 10 bid AT least
one spade we can surely make a law
that he shall not bid more than two
Some interesting letters have been re-
cclvcd emphasizing the point already
made IN these articles, that there is
nothing IN the argument for abalshing
the -Dadc sui. because no one wants
20 play the hand with spades for
trumps That is equally true Of the
club ana diamond bids, only s per cent
OF which tH2 out Of 1866. according to
the best statistics available) are worth
playing, although those bids are made
nearly So per cent. of the time.
The problem is not so much whether
the original declarcr wants to play the
hand as II Is to come to a satisfactory
understanding with his partner as to
what they can do with the twenty-six
cards That Is the foundation that un-
dcrlics any scientific partnership game.
II a dealer offers his partner "A couple
uf tricks in diamonds or clubs, to as
sIst any better bid his partner can MAKE.
he takes chance, as there is no limit
to The penalties I'm case the partner can
not avail himself of the offer Why not
let him bid one spade under the same
conditions?
lie has to bid two or three spades
now, and there is no limit to the penal
ties on his partners forced takeout
When the spade suit is cut out Of the
game the player frequently finds him
s,lf In "A cramped position and is tempt
, cd 90 make bids that he knows are un-
sound, simply because he thinks ne has
too good hand to pass without bid
uf some kind.
II is curious that a player who has
} been playing the no-bid rule In social
games FOR some time, and suddenly
comes back to the old style in a club
tournament, forgets himself and makes
one of the questionable bids that ne has
fallen into the habit Of substituting for
, the conventional spade bids. Nere Is n
7 deal, No. . in the last duplicate match
{ at the Knckerhocker which shows this
, popularity in the bidding. and presents
some still greater peculartles In the
I play.