Evening star., 1939-04-02

The agitation which now exists
among members of the Association
of Playing Card Manufacturers and
some of those who are classed as
experts, to change the suit valu-
ations in contract and make the
trick count 30 in all bidding except
no trump, instead of 80 for the
majors and 20 for the minors,
threatens to cause schism between
duplicate players and rubber bridge
players. If that happens 1t Is likely
to have a disastrous effect upon the
game
OF the millions in America who
play bridge not more than is per
cent are duplicate players. The re-
mainder are rubber bridge players
and those who play progressive or
party bridge. This proportion holds
true in Washington as we'll as else
where. The duplicate players, even
though greatly in the minority,
constitute organized bridge. Their
bodies make up the tournaments
and formulate the rules which rub
ber bridge players and progressive
bridge players follow and observe.
There is. however, no obligation
upon them to do so, especially now
that the game has been standard
ized.
Rubber bridge is played in social
clubs and in innumerable private
homes and progressive bridge at So
clal gatherings. Many rubber bridge
players have their own reasons,
which are good and sufficient for
not wishing to play duplicate, not
Withstanding the fact that hosts of
them are equally as proficient at the
game as are duplicate players. They
care nothing, however, about having
their names engraved on the silver
cups offered as trophies in the
duplicate games, nor are they in
terested in gaining master points
for superior play in public. They
prefer their quiet home or club
foursomes and are becoming very
weary of bridge dictatorship and the
desire to make changes in the game
merely for the sake of change and
not for improvement. Many of
them are beginning to rebel and
declare that they will play their
game as it is now constituted re-
gardless of what the bridge authori-
ties may do, as they are in no way
obligated to them or under their
jurisdiction Or cOOtrO1
' These players have gone along
for II years with the various i'm
provements in contract until now
they have a game that they believe
is about 100 per cent and they want
to retain it.
Moreover. it is argued that the
change will greatly slow up dupli-
cate for a long time. All players
will have to learn the new valua-
tions and changes and perfect them
selves in playing under them which
is likely to cause serious dropping
off in tournament play. and nothing
is to be gained except a change
and perhaps some financial profit to
those advocating it. This means to
a certain extent commercializing
the game instead of continuing it
as a social pastime.
Those in organized bridge should
realize that if. they are to augment
their numerical strength that they
must draw recruits from rubber
bridge players. The adoption of
the proposed changes will not do
so; it will tend to keep them away.
The argument of duplicate players
that their game, where all players
play the same set of hands, tends
to develop the greatest skill in the
best players, Is strenuously denied
by the rubber bridge players. The
fact is they do not play the same
hands against the same opponents
and that makes world of differ
ence. For example, pair No. l plays
against pair No. 2 and they are as
nearly matched in ability as is pos
sible to determine. Pair No. makes
two spades by perfect playing
against perfect defense. They score
part-game bonus. Pair No. plays
the same cards against pair No. 4,
who are just bit weaker and they
make three-odd, a score of 80 and
so or 140. Pair No. plays against