Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-08-31

or "Ill mention hearts" There is plenty
of informality and general social inter
course during their bridge sessions, just
as there is at ours, but during the bid
ding vast proportion of English bridge
players stick religiously to the words
prescribed by the laws of the game.
When one of these bridgerS wants to
bid one spade, he says lone spade
nothing else. When he bids three no
trump, all he says is 'three no trump"
When he doubles, he says 81 double
not Il crack it," as is the case with some
of our smart" players
There is something to be said for the
pleasure of being relaxed and calling out
the bids any old way, but plenty to be
said on the other side Of the question, If
a player mixes up his methods of making
particular call he can't help OCCASION
ally giving unauthorized information to
his partner. That is the chief reason
why it probably would be best for the
game if all players would pay more at
tention to using the standard method of
calling.
Il crack it" gives specific information
which Il double" does not for it admits
of no possibility of its being an informa-
tory double ooh, I guess I'll open the
bidding-yes, I'll bid SPADE can't fail
to indicate to partner that the hand is
barely strong enough for the bid. well,
think I had better pass" proclaimS a
hand almost good enough for bid. And
SO it goes.
Most players who use these varieties of
pronouncing their bids do not realize
that they are gaining an unfair advan-
tage over their opponents. They are
merely thoughtleSS. Some of the worst
offenders will probably discontinue the
practice if their friends point out to
them the error of their ways
E'T'HE mass of bridge players" writes
John M. Shedd, "are too mentally
lazy to study comprehensive book on
auction or contract. They want to pick
up the game by practice. I once asked
such a player if he thought it proper
for a surgeon to learn surgery by per-
forming operations on his friends That
is just what the bridge player does who
will not study.
ONE of the interesting reactions to the
effort of group of New England
bridge teachers to Standardize contract
bidding comes from another New Eng
lander, Miss Deborah N. Glover of Fair
field, Conn
1T may profess to be plea for stand
ardization of bidding" she writes, 'but
its first point is for Standardization of
hand valuations. To me there seems
more need for Standardization in the
actual bidding. For this, believe there
should be four types of opening bid
an average bid, a sem-forcing bid
forcing bid and a pre-emptive bid
two bid could be semi-forcing for a hand
with which partner needs something to
make game, and an artificial bid could
be used with the infrequent hand SO
strong that one feels sure there is game
regardless of whether partner holds a
trick, but depending on finding the best
fit of the two hands.
TN regard to partners response to a
one-b id-responses to others would have
to be based on the standards adopted
we need the following types: Average
raise assisting partners bid, denial of
partners bid, but showing fair strength
for something else, Jump raise in part
ner's bid, jump denial Of partners bid,
and thereby reserve the pass for the in
dication Of weakness.
ANY kind of bid in contract should
be an invitation for partner to continue
the bidding, the invitation being more or
less urgent, according to the type of bid
made The hmm raise and tho hmm do