The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-05-02
BIDS TO SAVE GAME
AT ROYAL AUCTION
Good Players Sometimes Go
Beyond tho Limit Of
Safety.
CHANCES RIGHTLY TAKEN

Among the many IDEAS that nave ap-
peared with regard to the proposed
changes In the laws OF auction bridge
there are one or two that suggest
return TO the old bridge rule of letting
either side score toward game. regard
less OF which side makes the winning
declaration and gets tho dummy. In
stead OF restricting the opponents TO
penalties In the honor column.
For the benent Of those who are
not familiar with the ethics Of bidding
games. II should be pointed out that
the theory Of all such games 10 to force
the bidding and to prevent the eau
tious player. who will not bid except on
a certainty. from winning the game BY
lying In wait.
In bidding games X a player wante
TO win anything ne must take q chance
OF losing something. 1t 10 tho applica-
ton Of the old maxim, Nothing VEN
ture, nothing have" There are some
bidding games In which the players who
are not tho highest bidders score to-
| ward game. but the amounts are usually
negligible. as in 500. and they are
| always under the restriction that the
| bidder has the first count.
II It were the rule for either side
| to score toward game on every deal At
auction the bidding would practically
| como to a standstill. as no one would
| risk a bid unless he had his con-
| tract in his own cards and counted on
| only average assistance to 20 game.
Some who have called attention to
| tho apparent discrepancy between the
| figures given by Milton Work and those
| Of DR.. MacKay with regard TO the
number of games that are won with the
aid OF previous score probably over
| look the fact that Milton Work counts
only the individual hand that wins the
game In which there 10 previous score,
whereas DR.. MacKay and those that
| collected the scores from the New York
| clubs some time ago count every hand.
| The point IL one OF peculiar interest.
| because OF its bearing on the modern
| theory that regards anything short OF
( game as unessential. II has been found
| that the average Is about 2l2 deals 20
a game. Some games will be won in
| single deal, while others will take three
and even more. such scores as TO- -,
| lG being not al all uncommon.
| The writer has seen a game In which
the first dealer was left with spade.
one diamond two diamonds and one
| club, and made them all. only 10 lose
| the game to the opponents after all.
Milton Work does not count any OF these
deals as none Of them helped TO win
any game. Or. MacKay counts them all
as deals that did not score 80 or more
points.
As It can he only the last deal that
| goes game with the assistance Of pre-
| V!ous score. the previous deals do moth
! ing and are not counted in Works tabu-
lation. IL will therefore he easily seen
that II the average il 2ia deals TO
| game and 10 or II per cent OF these
| hands do not reach 80. we must divide
this 10 per cent. by the 2i2 so as to in
clude the many hands that do not reach
game even with the assistance OF pre-
/ vious score and those that simply build
up that previous score.
This dividing 10 per cent. by -.
| brings us down to Works 4 per cent,
or one deal in every Twenty-Five. and
I shows that there is no discrepancy in
the tabulated results but simply differ
! ence in the definition OF the hands
! counted. The main fact still remains
that any score which is less than game
Is useful only about once In twenty five
| times. because In the average OF ga
deals 10 game the score made may be
useless both the first and the second
| and even tho third time.
Surprising a single game 20 BE- worth
an equity Of 1875 points at straight auc-
ton, that being It's hxed value IN dupl'-
cate The PLAYER who is always striving
to make few points might assume that
il he Is a game in he has half the rubber
won, or l95 points 20 his credit Then
. II ne can EtI lNtINN -lAuI pll A4l' s'N'liG
game he maeincs that he has mort
gage Il four ftths. or so per cent, OF
the i95 points that the second game is
worth, which would be an equity OF 100.
But this is fallacv because IL ten
out OF every eleven deals go game with
out the assistance OF previous score
the necessity for those - points on the
, second game will not arise more than
once In eleven games, so that his !nteres,
! 4, N,,l IVA. ~
stead OF so. In other words in his ef'
forts to win - points with a hand that
can never 60 game he Is appraisine
, those points at just eight times theiI
true value.
Therefore when the opponents. by
their bidding, offer him odds OF 6ia &c
|. and he cannot possibly go game or
MS own declaration, why should he re-
, verso tho position Why does he tr,
TO get into position that Is worth only
10 per cent OF the game. when they have
? placed him IN a position that Is WORTH
| 90?
But this refusal TO play for a fe~
points when the game can neither b,
won nor lost on the deal seems 10 rur
contrary to the grasping spirit OF the
age, and players are continually tax
> Ing precisely the same risks at auction
that one sees them take on interior
81
3 In both cases the motive Is tho same
Y They want TO play the hand, and they
4 hope lightning will strike. them, Wher
4 it does, they forget the hundreds o
, times that II did not even rain.
When the game is in danger It II
e quite different matter. and the same
. p,ayers who are so quick at assumni
e risks that are entirely unnecessary wher
L. they want to play tho hand TO win
| few points seem blind to the importance
of taking these risks when II IL a GER
tainty that they will lose.
= Good players understand that II Il 4
$ highly probable that tho opponents vii
3 70 game on their declaration anythn,
> that has a chance to head them off mus
e be declared. even beyond the limit o
V possibility or safety. II is no longer
n question OF going game, but of saylni
o 1t at the minimum OF expense.
o Any player OF experience will fire.
quently overbid his hand couple o
tricks and take a sting OF so or 100 IN
order to save the game. II then FIRE
qucntly becomes u question as to which
side will get stung II both of them ar,
afraid ana each Is willing to take IN,
chance.
Here is n rather interesting deal whici
illustrates the personal equation in han
ding such situations. Either side car
make four odd II they bid It, but neither
can make Ave against good play. II
other words. whichever side Is wlllnl
to overstep the bounds OF safety anC
bid the Ave will get stung, but will say,
the game, 1t was No, "a in the las
Il to ma nh tl,a tplF ayl, plg