Evening star., 1939-04-16

spades, and It is DR.. Hooe's conten-
ton that DR.. Cannon should not
have allowed the bidding to die when
he bid four no-trump but should
have kept 1t open for one more
round to enable him to bid the slam.
DR.. Cannon maintains that his
obligation ceased when q game con-
tract was reached.
In passing an opinion upon this
dispute 1t must be stated that both
contenders are in part in error, DR..
Cannon more so than DR.. Hooe.
Under the Culbertson system, which
both were assuming to play the bid
ding should have been, East two
hearts, South pass, West, two no.
trump; East, three spades; South,
pass; West, four spades; East, six
spades, or six hearts, the latter pref
erably, since the score is the same
whether the contract is six hearts or
six spades, either of which can be
made on the bidding.
The error of DR.. Hooe lay in the
fact that he interjected bid of
four no trump on the third round
OF bidding. 1t Is quite evident that
he did this in order to force his
partner to call five clubs, if he held
the ace of that suit, as that card
would enable East to bid and make
seven hearts. The four no-trump
bid, however, was wrong and unwise
for West, by his first response of
two no trump, had already said that
ne held no aces and that his hand
was negative. In the one-over-one
system a call of four no trump by
East would have been permissible,
but not necessary according to the
Culbertson forcing system. Once
the bid has been made, however,
West cannot allow the bidding to
cease, but is under the obligation
to keep it open by calling five in
the lowest of the two bid suits.
which would, in this case, have
been hearts. East would then 20 to
six hearts or six spades, since Vests
four-spade bid has given him the
assurance that he has fit in that
suit and nothing else.
DR.. Gannon's argument is that
having kept the bidding open until
game contract was reached his
responsibility ceased there. Such
Is not the case. He should have
kept the bidding open one time
more IN order to enable his partner
to make a slam bid which is clearly
indicated as possible by his original
bid and by Vests secondary four
spade response. If East hasn't his
original bid the fault is his and no
blame can be attached to West II
East goes to a slam and is not able
to make it.
The issue has been debated in
numerous duplicate and rubber
bridge games and many good play
ers have contended there was no
obligation upon West to continue
the bidding after a game contract
had been reached. Mainly, how
ever, their argument in this respect
is based upon the fact that East
put In a four no-trump bid which
he should not have done in view
Of the situation where he was play
ing a forcing system. That bid
might indicate that he did not have
perfect two-suit hand-and so the
question remains in debate.
M. o. B. wants advice as to what
the player in the East position
should do in the following circum-
stances. The bidding has gone:
East South West North
Pass IA Dbl Pass
East holds this hand:
4 j 10 852
va
= K43
4 54
Without question, East is on the
spot. Having five spades to the
jack. 10, he has the bidders suit
twice stopped, but there is nothing
else worth mentjnn{po In tha ra