Evening star., 1937-02-28

OUUluUu oIuuluS cAAOAo'
r UP UNTIL now in our discussion
of common bidding faults we
have dealt with more or less
~ specific errors. Today We are
going to move into the field of gen.
eralities, and as a starter we find that
a great majority of bridge players bid
in such manner as to get the play in
their own hand rather than in that
of partner. Some Of the specific bids
already discussed, such as the i'm
mediate responses of one and two no.
trump when a suit bid would be pref
cradle, are merely sign Of this de-
sire. But the number of other cases
where it occurs is legion. For instance,
We have the case Of the mule" The
mule" deals and picks up the follow
ing hand:
Spades AQxx
Hearts
Diamonds K Xxx
Clubs XXX
and opens the bidding quite properly
with one spade. His partner responds
with two hearts and the mule" prop
erly rebids to two spades. Now the
partner bids three hearts, and at this
point the mule" should pass. After
all, he opened the bidding with spades
and rebid that suit, and all his partner
has done is bid hearts in minimums.
AS a result, the mule" has no rea-
son to suspect that his partner holds
anything but long. heart suit and no
side strength; for instance, head
such as:
Spades
Hearts K J1oxxx
Diamonds Xxx
Clubs xxx
The three-heart contract is not
doubled and undoubtedly won't be
doubled. However, the mule" sees
only his own hand and bids three
spades, or perhaps an even less ex-
cusable three no-trump. If he bids
three spades, his partner may have
enough sense to pass. But suppose the
mule" bids three no-trump and is
doubled. Now his partner has to go
to four hearts, contract which Is not
going to be hurt badly If he has the
hand we have just shown. But we
know of cases where the mule" goes
much further and will probably now
bid four spades over his partners four
hearts!
An extreme example Of mulishness,
in this instance combined with gen.
eral bridge stupidity, appeared recent
ly in the columns of one of our con-
temporaries. Robert Neville Of the New
York Herald Tribune. It seems that
North held:
Spades A xxxx
Hearts A 10xxx
Diamonds -
Clubs AK
and passed as dealer. East opened
with one club, whereupon South bid
three diamonds. North now bid three
hearts, South four diamonds, North
four spades, South five diamonds and
North five hearts, which was promptly
doubled South, who naturally had o
very long diamond suit and no sup
port for either spades or hearts, now
passed, and the hand was down four
tricks, whereas five diamonds could
have been made.
In commenting on the hand Mr..
Neville pointed out that North should
certainly have opened the bidding, and
also called attention to the fact that
even with a void of diamonds, once
his partner had bid three, four and
five in that suit, any sensible player
would have let the matter 60 there
rather than continue to bid his own
five-card suits indefinitely. But we do
not feel Mr.. Neville went anywhere
near far enough. In our opinion, II
there is such thing as q license to
play bridge. North's should be taken
away from him until such time as he
learns what constitutes an opening bid
and when to pass, and that the pos
session OF two f1ve-card suits does not
entitle him to bid them forever, or the
fact that he is void in his partners
suit does not mean that the hand can
not be played in that suit. After all,
seven-card suits are quite common and
eight and nine card suits are not en-
tirely unheard Of.
The preceding example is, of course,
an extreme case, and we feel 1t would
be hard to find any one who would
bid that hand as badly as North did.
But there is another case where many
people 60 wrong. North holds:
Spades xxx
Hearts K XIX
Diamonds XXI
Clubs A K <
South opens with one spade and
ASo~&t, ~,,ita y.paSs>elS, ,asvasaAs v,ikja