Section 9 of Etiquette provides: "If a player say, 'I have the rest,'

E-text prepared by Rick Niles and the Project Gutenberg Online Distributed

Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net)

Transcriber's note:

Minor typographical errors have been corrected without note.

AUCTION OF TO-DAY

by

MILTON C. WORK

Author of "Whist of To-day"

Boston and New York

Houghton Mifflin Company

The Riverside Press Cambridge

1913

Copyright, 1913, by Milton C. Work

All Rights Reserved

Published January 1913

THIS BOOK

IS RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED

TO

THE AUCTION PLAYERS OF THE RACQUET CLUB

OF PHILADELPHIA,

WHO, WHILE OTHERS DOUBTED AND WAITED,

WERE SUFFICIENTLY BROADMINDED AND DISCERNING

TO ADOPT THE "NEW COUNT"

AND WHO, THEREFORE, PLAYED AUCTION OF TO-DAY

MONTHS BEFORE IT WAS IN VOGUE

ELSEWHERE

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION xi

I. THE DECLARATION 1

II. ORIGINAL DECLARATIONS BY THE DEALER 15

The Bid of One No-trump.

Table of Hands in which the No-trump Declaration

is Doubtful.

When to bid Two No-trumps.

Exception to the No-trump Rule.

Table of Doubtful Hands illustrating Exception.

Suit Declarations.

Various Ideas of the Two Spade Bid.

The Two Spade Bid.

The Three Spade Bid.

When to bid Two in Either Royals or Hearts.

When to bid Three in Either Royals or Hearts.

The Two Bid in Diamonds or Clubs.

How to declare Two-Suit Hands.

Table of Hands in which a Trump Declaration

is Doubtful.

III. SECOND HAND DECLARATIONS 60

Bidding over One Spade.

When to bid No-trump.

When to make a Trump Declaration.

The Double of One Spade.

The Bid of Two Spades.

Table of Spade Bids.

The Bid of Three Spades.

How Second Hand should bid after an Offensive

Declaration.

The Shift.

When to Bid Two No-trumps over One No-trump.

How to Bid against Two or Three Spades.

When to Bid No-trump over a Suit.

IV. THIRD HAND DECLARATIONS 82

When the Dealer has called One Spade, and the

Second Hand passed.

When the Dealer has shown Strength, and the

Second Hand passed.

When "Two Spades" has been declared.

When "Three Spades" has been declared.

When "One Club" or "One Diamond" has been declared.

When "Two Diamonds" or "Two Clubs" has been declared.

When "One Heart" or "One Royal" has been declared.

When "Two Hearts" or "Two Royals" has been declared.

When to overbid a Partner's No-trump.

When to overbid with Strong Clubs.

A New Plan for Overbidding.

When to overbid One No-trump with Two No-trumps.

What Third Hand should bid when Second Hand has declared.

V. FOURTH HAND DECLARATIONS 114

When the Dealer's Defensive Declaration has been

the Only Bid.

When the Only Offensive Declaration has been

made by the Dealer.

When the Only Offensive Declaration has been

made by the Second Hand.

When the Only Offensive Declaration has been

made by the Third Hand.

When the Dealer has Made a Defensive, and both the

Second and Third Hands Offensive, Declarations.

When the Dealer and Second Hand have made

Offensive Declarations, and the Third Hand passed.

When the Dealer and Third Hand have made

Offensive Declarations, and the Second Hand passed.

When all Three Players have made Offensive Declarations.

VI. CONTINUATION OF THE BIDDING 130

When to advance the Bid.

When to overbid the Partner.

Flag-Flying.

VII. DOUBLING 143

The Choice between a Game and a Double.

When to redouble.

What to do when the Partner is doubled.

VIII. LEADING 158

How to lead against a No-trump.

Number-showing Leads.

The Lead against a Suit Declaration.

How to lead to a Double.

Table of Opening Leads against a Trump Declaration.

IX. THE PLAY 183

Difference between Play in Auction and Bridge.

Playing for Game.

Play for an Even Break.

General Play of the Declarer.

Declarer's Play of No-trump.

Declarer's Play of a Suit Declaration.

Play by Declarer's Adversaries.

The Signal.

The Discard.

Blocking the Dummy.

Avoid opening New Suits.

How to return Partner's Bid.

The Finesse.

Table showing when Third Hand should finesse.

X. SCORING AND SCORE-SHEETS 213

Samples of Score-Sheets.

XI. THE LAWS 225

1912 Code of The Whist Club of New York.

Decisions by the Card Committee of The Whist Club

of New York.

SUMMARIZED PENALTIES 277

APPENDIX: QUERIES AND ANSWERS 279

INTRODUCTION

With so many excellent textbooks now in circulation, it seems almost

audacious to add another treatise to current card literature. It

happens, however, that the game of Auction, or Auction Bridge, as it is

generally called ("Auction Whist" is perhaps a more appropriate title),

has been so completely and so suddenly revolutionized that books

written upon the subject a few months ago do not treat of Auction of

to-day, but of a game abandoned in the march of progress. Only a small

portion of the change has been due to the development of the game, the

alteration that has taken place in the count having been the main

factor in the transformation. Just as a nation, in the course of a

century, changes its habits, customs, and ideas, so Auction in a few

months has developed surprising innovations, and evolved theories that

only yesterday would have seemed to belong to the heretic or the

fanatic. The expert bidder of last Christmas would find himself a

veritable Rip Van Winkle, should he awake in the midst of a game of

to-day.

The present tourist along the newly macadamized Auction highway has no

modern signpost to guide him, no milestone to mark his progress. The

old ones, while most excellent when erected, now lead to abandoned and

impassable roads, and contain information that of necessity confuses

and misleads.

Beyond doubt, the present game, like other modern improvements, has

come to stay, and with that belief the following pages are offered as

an aid to the thorough understanding of the new order of things.

Until the latter part of 1911, practically all players used the same

count in Auction that had for years obtained in Bridge; namely,

No-trump, 12; Hearts, 8; Diamonds, 6; Clubs, 4; and Spades, 2. The

change was first suggested by the author, and it, therefore, seems only

appropriate that he, having had the good fortune to conceive a system

which has been endorsed by general adoption, should have the privilege

of giving to the Auction-loving public his views upon the most

advantageous methods of playing the game under the new conditions, and

thus possibly help to allay the confusion created by the introduction

of an innovation so drastic.

In this connection, it may be interesting to recall how this new count,

which is now so universally used that it should be called, not the

"new" count, but "the" count, came to be suggested, and why it met with

popular favor.

When Auction first took the place of Bridge as the paramount game in

the club and social life of the scientific card-player of the United

States (just as Bridge had previously superseded Whist), it was but

natural that the Bridge count should be continued in Auction.

Admitting that these values were the best possible for Bridge (and of

that there is considerable doubt in the mind of the player of to-day),

it, nevertheless, did not mean that for the new and very different game

of Auction they would of necessity be the most suitable. It was soon

found that the No-trump was so much more powerful than any other bid

that competition was almost eliminated. With even unusually strong

suits, only occasionally could a declaration valued at 12 be

successfully combated by one valued at 8 or less, and the vast majority

of hands were, consequently, played without a Trump.

The inherent theory of the game of Auction provides for a bidding in

which each one of the four suits competes with each other, and also

with the No-trump. Using the Bridge count, this does not take place.

The two black suits, by reason of their inconsequential valuation, are

practically eliminated from the sea of competitive bidding. The Diamond

creates only a slight ripple, and even the Heart has to be unusually

strong to resist the strenuous wave of the No-trump.

Players in different parts of the country realized that as long as the

Bridge count was used, five bids could not compete in the race, as, due

to unequal handicapping, the two blacks could barely pass the starter,

while the two reds could not last long in a keen contest.

The desire to make the Spade a potent declaration had appeared in

Bridge; Royal Spades, valued at 10, having been played by some

unfortunates who believed that, whenever they had the deal, the fickle

goddess favored them with an undue proportion of "black beauties." As

competitive bidding is not a part of the game of Bridge, that could not

be offered as a reason for increasing the value of the Spade, and to be

logical, Royal Clubs should also have been created. Naturally, Royal

Spades never received any very large or intelligent Bridge following,

but as making the Spade of value was in line with the obvious need of

Auction, as soon as that game became the popular pastime, Royal Spades

(or Lilies, as they were perhaps foolishly called in some places, the

pseudonym being suggested by the color of the Spade), valued at 11 and

at 10, were accorded a more thorough trial.

They met objection on the ground that three Royals, equally with three

No-trumps, carried a side to game from a love score, and, therefore,

while some continued to experiment with Royals, it cannot be said that

they were anywhere accepted as a conventional part of Auction. Finally,

some clever Bostonians suggested that their value be made nine, and

this proved both more logical and more popular.

With affairs in this state, the author determined that it would

materially improve the game to arrange the count so that the various

bids be as nearly as possible equalized, every suit given a real

rating, and the maximum competition created. After some little

experimentation, the very simple expedient now in vogue was suggested.

It makes the game _in reality_ what it previously was _only in name_.

In September, 1911, the Racquet Club of Philadelphia, the first club to

act upon the subject, incorporated in its club code the count of 10 for

No-trump, 9 for Royal Spades, 8 for Hearts, 7 for Diamonds, 6 for

Clubs, and 2 for Spades. Other clubs in this country and abroad slowly

but surely followed, and the card-playing public in its social game

adopted the new plan as soon as it received a fair trial.

Early in 1912, the Whist Club of New York, a most conservative body,

yielded to the pressure, and accepted the new count. Since then, it has

been universally used.

It has been given various names, such as the "new count," which is, of

course, a title that cannot long be retained; the "Philadelphia count,"

which is now inappropriate, as it is played in all parts of the

country; the "game of Royals," which is grossly incorrect, as it is not

a game of Royals any more than of any other suit, and certainly is not

one-tenth as much a game of Royals as the old count was a game of

No-trumps. One writer, who ably advocates the new count, calls the

present game "Royal Auction Bridge," yet frankly admits that No-trump

is still played more frequently than Royals, and Hearts almost as

often. There can be no question that the number of Diamond and Club

declarations has materially increased, so the only apparent reason for

calling the game Royals is the desire for some name to distinguish the

count now used from its predecessor. That, however, is totally

unnecessary. The old, or Bridge count, is a thing of the past--dead and

almost forgotten. The "new" count is "Auction"--"Auction of To-day" if

you will, but unquestionably the best Auction yet devised, the only

Auction now played, and destined to be Auction for all future time,

unless some system be suggested which will create keener competition in

bidding. It is generally conceded that this is practically impossible.

In this book the author does not attempt to drill the uninitiated

player in the intricacies of the game. The rudiments can be learned far

more satisfactorily by watching a rubber, or by receiving the kindly

instruction of a friend or teacher.

In perusing these pages, the beginner will seek in vain to receive such

information as that the 10 is a higher card than the 9; or that the

Third Hand plays after the Second. The reader is supposed to thoroughly

understand the respective values of the cards, as well as the

underlying principles and the rules of the game.

Neither is this book intended for the player who recognizes himself as

an expert and continuously prates of his own ability. Even should he

condescend to read, he would find either "nothing new," or "nothing new

worth knowing." Why, indeed, should he waste his valuable time

considering the ideas of others, when by his brilliant exposition of

his own inimitable theories, he can inculcate in the minds of his

inferiors a new conception of Auction possibilities? Such a player may

at any time confuse a conscientious partner by making an original bid

without an Ace or King, or by committing some equally atrocious Auction

_faux pas_, but as even a constant recurrence of such "trifles" will

not disturb his equanimity, why suggest ideas for his guidance?

The real purpose of this little book is to point out to the moderate

player the system of bidding and methods of play now adopted by the

best exponents of the game, and to advise generally how to produce a

satisfactory result at the end of the rubber, sitting, or season.

Much of the success of an Auction player is due to his ability to

concentrate his entire attention upon the game. If it were possible to

make only a single suggestion to a beginner, the most important point

that could be called to his attention would be the necessity for

concentration. From the moment the first bid is made until the last

card is played, the attention of every player should be confined to the

declaration and the play, and during that time no other idea should

enter his mind. This may seem rudimentary, but as a matter of fact, the

loss of tricks is frequently blamed upon various causes, such as

"pulling the wrong card," forgetting that a certain declaration had

been made, or that a certain card has been played, miscounting the

Trumps or the suit in question, etc., when the lack of complete

concentration is the real trouble.

Success in Auction is indeed difficult, and the player who would grasp

every situation, and capture every possible trick, must have the power

to concentrate all his faculties upon the task before him. No matter

how great his capacity, he cannot do thorough justice to any hand, if,

during the declaration or play, his mind wander. Too often do we see a

player, while the play is in progress, thinking of some such subject as

how many more tricks his partner might have made in the last hand;

whether his partner has declared in the manner which he believes to be

sound and conventional; what is going on at some other table; whether

this rubber will be over in time for him to play another, etc.

When this is the mental condition of a player, the best results cannot

be obtained. If a trick has been lost, it is gone. Thinking over it

cannot bring it back, but may very quickly give it one or more

comrades. As soon as each deal is completed, it should be erased from

the mind just as figures from a slate. In that way only can be obtained

the complete and absolute concentration which is essential to perfect

play, and goes a long way toward securing it.

Auction is beyond doubt the most scientific card game that has ever

become popular in this country. The expert has the full measure of

advantage to which his skill entitles him, and yet the game possesses

wonderful fascination for the beginner and player of average ability.

It is doubtless destined to a long term of increasing popularity, and

it is, therefore, most advisable for all who participate that they

thoroughly familiarize themselves with the conventional methods of

bidding and playing, so that they may become intelligent partners, and

a real addition to any table.

AUCTION OF TO-DAY

I

THE DECLARATION[1]

It is well to realize from the start that the declaration is the most

important department of the game, and yet the most simple to master. A

foolish bid may cost hundreds of points. The failure to make a sound

one may lose a rubber, whereas mistakes in the play, while often

expensive and irritating, are rarely attended with such disastrous

results.

[1] Also known as "the Bid" and "the Call."

Any good player who has to choose between a partner who bids well and

plays poorly, and one who is a wild or unreliable bidder, but handles

his cards with perfection, without hesitation selects the former.

To be an expert player requires natural skill, long experience, keen

intuition, deep concentration, and is an art that cannot be accurately

taught either by the instructor or by a textbook. Bidding has been

reduced to a more or less definite system, which may be learned in a

comparatively brief space of time. Consequently, any one possessed of

ordinary intelligence, regardless of sex, age, temperament, or

experience, may become an expert declarer, but of all who attempt to

play, not more than forty per cent. possess that almost indefinable

characteristic known as a "card head," without which it is impossible

to become a player of the highest class.

The average club or social game, however, produces numerous expert

players, while the sound bidder is indeed a _rara avis_.

The explanation of this peculiar condition is not hard to find. Most

Auction devotees began their card experience with Whist, a game in

which, beyond doubt, "The play's the thing"; then they transferred

their allegiance to Bridge, where the play was the predominant factor;

and now they fail to realize that in their new pastime _the most

important part of the game is concluded before the first card leaves

the leader's hand_.

It must encourage the student to know that he may surely and quickly

become a sound bidder, and that he will then be a more valued partner

than a Whist or Bridge celebrity who does not accord to the Declaration

the care it deserves and rewards.

Many methods of bidding have been suggested; some have been so absurd

that they have not warranted or received serious consideration; others

have been accorded a thorough trial, and found wanting.

The system which is herein advocated is believed to be the most sound

and informatory yet devised.

Before taking up the declaration by each hand, it is important for the

player to realize that with the introduction of the count of to-day,

much of the bidding previously in vogue has, of necessity, passed into

disuse. For example, under the old count, a player, knowing that the

Club suit would never be played and that there was no danger of that

declaration being continued by his partner, very properly called a Club

to show the Ace and King, even when these two cards were the only Clubs

in his hand.

In Auction of to-day, it being possible to score game with any

declaration, a suit cannot be safely called unless it be of such length

and strength that the partner may continue it as far as his hand

warrants. In discussing the subject of Bidding, under the subheads of

DEALER, SECOND HAND, etc., this will be considered more thoroughly, and

it is referred to at this time only for the purpose of pointing out

that informatory bids from short suits containing high cards are no

longer included in the vocabulary of the Declarer.

Another difference between the old and the present game is worthy of

notice. In the old game a marked distinction was drawn between the

color of the suits in the make-up of a No-trumper, it being more

important that the black suits should be guarded than the red. Using

the Bridge count, the adversaries, if strong in the red suits, were apt

to bid, but the black suits, by reason of their low valuation,

frequently could not be called. Black was, consequently, the natural

lead against a No-trump, and therefore, required more protection.

Now, as every suit can be named with practically equal effectiveness,

the color distinction has ceased to exist. The original leader, when

No-trump has been declared, no longer attempts to guess his partner's

strength by starting with a black suit, in preference to a red; and in

bidding one No-trump, strength in one color is just as valuable as in

the other.

When Auction was first played in England, it was believed that the deal

was a disadvantage, that the Declarer should disguise his hand as long

as possible and use every expedient to force his adversary to be the

first to show real strength. This doctrine has been found to be

ridiculous. The premium of 250 for winning the rubber is a bonus well

worth having, and the player who, when his cards justify a bid, unduly

postpones his declaration, belongs to an antiquated and almost extinct

school.

It is now conceded that the best results are obtained by that character

of bidding which gives the partner the most immediate and accurate

information regarding the strength of the Declarer.

There are still the "old fogies" who preach that, as there are two

opponents and only one partner, all information is doubly advantageous

to the adversary. This "moss-covered" idea was advanced concerning the

play in Whist and Bridge, but experience proved it fallacious. In

Auction, its folly is apparent, not only in the matter of the play, but

even more surely when applied to the bidding.

A moment's consideration causes the realization that the declaration

would become an easy task if the exact composition of the partner's

hand were known; it should, therefore, be the aim of the bidder to

simplify the next call of his partner by describing his own cards as

accurately as possible.

True it is that the deceptive bidder at times succeeds in duping some

confiding or inexperienced adversary and thereby achieves a temporary

triumph of which he loves to boast. For every such _coup_, however, he

loses many conventional opportunities, frequently gets into trouble,

and keeps his partner in a continual state of nervous unrest, entirely

inimical to the exercise of sound judgment. Nevertheless, the erratic

one rarely realizes this. He gives his deceptive play the credit for

his winning whenever he holds cards with which it is impossible for

him to lose, but characterizes as "hard luck" the hundreds that his

adversaries tally in their honor columns by reason of his antics, and

is oblivious of the opportunities to win games which he allows to slip

from his grasp.

The difference between informative and deceptive bidding is shown in

the harmony of a partnership. When the former is practised, the pair

pull together; the latter results in misunderstandings and disputes.

It must not be understood, however, that the ability to give accurate

information comprises the entire skill of the bidder. It is most

important that he possess the judgment which enables him to force the

adversary into dangerous waters without getting beyond his own depth.

It is no excuse for a player who has led his partner on to their mutual

destruction to murmur, "I could have made my bid." An early bid being

allowed to become the final declaration is exceptional. Whether or not

it could be made is, therefore, immaterial, but the result it may

produce is vital.

In club circles the story is told of the player of experience, who,

after he had been deceived by his partner's declaration, said:

"Partner, if you were reading the paper to a stranger, you would not

vary a word of even an unimportant item. Why, then, should you, in

describing your thirteen cards, deliberately misinform a trusting

partner?"

Another exploded idea is that an advantage can be obtained by so-called

"misleading" or "trap" bidding. There are some players who imagine

that, by calling one Spade with an excellent hand, they can induce the

adversaries to believe that the bidder possesses a trickless

combination, and as a result, some ridiculous declaration will follow,

which will give an opportunity for a profitable double. Experience has

shown that in practice this idea does not produce satisfactory results.

Adversaries will not bid to a point where they are apt to be doubled,

except in the face of competition. When the Dealer has called one

Spade, his partner, unless he hold very strong cards, will not

materially elevate the declaration. If both partners have strength, it

is not probable that the adversaries can do much bidding, so that it is

only in the unusual case, and against the inexperienced and unskilled,

that such a scheme is apt to prove successful. On the other hand, it

transfers the advantage of being the first to show strength and abuses

the confidence of the partner. It is a tool which should be employed

only by the Declarer of ripe experience, and he will limit its use to

the unusual hand.

The bidder should remember that part of the finesse of the game, when

partners vary considerably in their respective skill, is to so arrange

the declaration that the stronger player is at the helm most of the

time. A weak player with a strong partner should not jump with undue

haste into a No-trump, Royal, or Heart declaration; but rather, wait

for the partner, and then back up his call. The weak player should also

hesitate before taking away his partner's bid, although of course,

there are many situations which thoroughly justify it, regardless of

the greatest difference in the skill of the players.

The objection to the game of Auction which makes it the subject of the

most severe criticism is the possibility that improper information may

be conveyed to the partner by the manner of making the bid.

After starting to bid, by using the word "one" or "two" there should

never be any hesitation, as that tells the partner that there is more

than one call under consideration. The same comment applies to

hesitation when it is evident to the partner that it must be caused by

a doubt whether or not to double, and the opportunity so to do still

remains with him. An extended delay in passing or bidding one Spade

also conveys an obvious suggestion. It goes without saying that no

honorable partner would avail himself of such information. Being the

unwilling recipient of it, however, places him in an awkward position,

as he must cross-examine himself as to whether any questionable bid or

double he contemplates is in any way encouraged by it. If he have even

a scintilla of doubt, he must pass.

A few principles of bidding applicable to all conditions may be stated

at the beginning of the consideration of the subject.

Adopt informatory and conservative methods.

A good player may bid higher than a poor one.

When your partner fails to assist your bid, do not count on him for

more strength than a Dealer who has bid one Spade.

Any overbid of an adversary shows strength; an overbid of a partner who

has declared No-trump may show weakness.

Overbidding a partner who has declared Royals or Hearts shows weakness

in his suit.

Being without a suit, or holding a singleton, is an element of strength

for a Trump declaration; of weakness for a No-trumper.

When, if you do not bid, the adversary will be left in with a

declaration with which he cannot make game, do not take him out unless

you expect to score game with your declaration.

Do not, by reckless bidding, make the loss of one rubber equal the

usual value of two.

With a love score, it requires three tricks in No-trumps, four in

Royals or Hearts, and five in Diamonds or Clubs, to make game. It is an

exceptional hand in which the Declarer does not lose more than two

tricks. Diamonds and Clubs are, therefore, rarely played in preference

to one of the three declarations of higher value, which are spoken of

as "game-going" declarations.

There is very little declaring to the score in Auction, as the majority

of deals in which the contract is fulfilled score game, so that most of

the time the score is love. In a certain percentage of cases, however,

there is a score, and it affects the bidding to the following extent:--

If it be 2 or more, Diamonds should be treated as Royals or Hearts

would be at love; if it be 6 or more, Clubs should be similarly

treated.

If it be 3 or more, Royals, with a holding of five or more, should be

bid in preference to No-trump, even with all the suits stopped, and if

it be 6 or more, Hearts should be similarly treated.

When the score reaches a higher figure, such as 16, for example,

holding five Diamonds, Hearts, or Spades, suit bids should be given the

preference over No-trumpers.

The reason is plain. The winning of the game is the object of the

bidder; when that is in sight with a suit declaration, No-trump should

not be risked unless in the higher declaration the fulfilment of the

contract be equally sure.

The establishment of an adverse suit is the rock which sinks many a

No-trumper. There is little chance of this with a suit declaration.

Therefore, especially when it does not require any more tricks to go

game, the suit should be selected, if the No-trump present any element

of danger.

The state of the score never justifies an original bid which would not

be conventional at love. In other words, while being the possessor of a

score may make it wise for a bidder to select a suit instead of a

No-trump, it never justifies his calling a suit in which he has not

both the length and strength requisite for a declaration with a love

score.

Bidding by the different hands is so varied in its character that each

must be considered as practically a separate subject, and they will,

therefore, be taken up _seriatim_. In all cases where the score is not

especially mentioned, it should be understood that neither side is

supposed to have scored.

II

ORIGINAL DECLARATIONS BY THE DEALER

The Dealer, in making the initial declaration, obtains a valuable

strategic position whenever his hand justifies an offensive bid

(_i.e._, anything but one Spade); but when he is compelled to assume

the defensive, this advantage passes to his opponents. By any

declaration which shows strength, he materially aids his partner and

places difficulties in the path of his adversaries. A No-trump is

naturally his most advantageous opening.

There are many hands in which the strength is so evenly divided that

the advantage of playing the Dummy enables the player who "gets to the

No-trump first" to make good his declaration, and frequently, in such

equally balanced hands, one No-trump is the only bid that can be made.

One No-trump eliminates all adverse calls of one, and sometimes when

the strength of the opponents is considerable, but divided, results in

shutting out a productive declaration. The Dealer, therefore, whenever

his hand warrants it, should grasp his good fortune and declare his

strength.

He should not, however, rashly assume the offensive. There is no way in

which he can more thoroughly deceive his partner, create greater havoc

with the bidding of the hand and cast deeper distrust upon his future

declarations than by using the keynote bid to announce strength which

his hand does not contain.

He must thoroughly understand the conventional declarations, and when

in doubt should bid one Spade, as the damage which is apt to result

from an overestimation by his partner of his winning cards is much

greater than any benefit gained by starting the attack.

THE BID OF ONE NO-TRUMP

The Dealer is justified in basing his declaration upon the assumption

that his partner has one-third of the high cards not in his own hand.

He may, therefore, _bid one No-trump with any holding better than the

average_ whenever he has

(_a_) Four suits stopped.

(_b_) Three suits stopped and his hand contains an Ace.

(_c_) Three King suits, all of which contain in addition either

Queen or Knave.

(_d_) A solid five-card Club or Diamond suit and another Ace.

The first question to determine is what, from the standpoint of the

Declarer, constitutes a guarded or stopped suit.

That an Ace comes under that head is self-evident.

So also must a King, if accompanied by one small, because the lead

comes up to the Declarer, and the King must either be able to win the

trick or be made good.

A Queen and one other manifestly will not stop a suit, and a Queen and

two others is not apt to do so unless the leader hold both Ace and

King. Queen and three others is, however, comparatively safe, and

Queen, Knave, and one other is a most satisfactory guard.

Knave, Ten, and two others surely stops a suit, but Knave and three

small is about as unreliable as Queen and two small. It, therefore,

becomes evident that the Dealer, to count a suit as stopped, must have

in it one of the following holdings:--

Ace.

King and one other.

Queen and three others.

Queen, Knave, and one other.

Knave and four others.

Knave, Ten, and two others.

Some experts, with three suits stopped, bid No-trump with exactly an

average hand, but experience has shown that this is advisable only when

supported by exceptional skill, and cannot be recommended to most

players. The average holding of high cards is one Ace, one King, one

Queen, and one Knave. From the average standpoint it is immaterial

whether they are all in one suit or divided. Any hand containing a face

card or Ace above this average is a No-trumper, whenever it complies

with the other above-mentioned requirements. When the average is

exceeded by holding two Aces, instead of an Ace and King, a No-trump

should be called, but two Kings, instead of a King and Queen, or even a

King and Knave, is a very slight margin, and the declaration is

doubtful for any but the most expert. A hand with two Queens instead of

one Queen and one Knave, while technically above the average, cannot be

so considered when viewed from a trick-taking standpoint, and does not

warrant a No-trump call.

In bidding No-trump with three guarded suits, it does not matter which

is unprotected. For example, the minimum strength of a No-trumper

composed of one face card more than the average is an Ace in one suit;

King, Knave, in another; and Queen, Knave, in a third. This hand would

be a No-trumper, regardless of whether the suit void of strength

happened to be Hearts, Diamonds, Clubs, or Spades.

The above-described method of determining when the hand sizes up to the

No-trump standard is generally known as the "average system," and has

been found more simple and much safer than any of the other tests

suggested. It avoids the necessity of taking the Ten into

consideration, and does not involve the problems in mental arithmetic

which become necessary when each honor is valued at a certain figure

and a total fixed as requisite for a No-trump bid.

The theory upon which a player with possibly only three tricks declares

to take seven, is that a hand containing three sure tricks, benefited

by the advantage derived from having twenty-six cards played in unison,

is apt to produce one more; and until the Dummy refuse to help, he may

be figured on for average assistance. The Dealer is expecting to take

four tricks with his own hand, and if the Dummy take three (one-third

of the remaining nine), he will fulfil his contract. Even if the Dummy

fail to render the amount of aid the doctrine of chances makes

probable, the declaration is not likely to prove disastrous, as one

No-trump is rarely doubled.

It is also conventional to declare one No-trump with a five-card or

longer Club or Diamond suit,[2] headed by Ace, King, Queen, and one

other Ace. This is the only hand containing strength in but two suits

with which a No-trump should be called.

[2] With a similar suit in either Spades or Hearts, Royals or

Hearts should be the bid.

As a rule a combination of high cards massed into two suits does not

produce a No-trumper, although the same cards, divided into three

suits, may do so. For example, a hand containing Ace, Queen, Knave, in

one suit; King, Queen, Knave, in another, and the two remaining suits

unguarded, should not be bid No-trump, although the high cards are

stronger than the example given above with strength in three suits.

Admitting all the advantage of the original No-trump, even the boldest

bidders do not consider it a sound declaration with two defenseless

suits, unless one of the strong suits be established and the other

headed by an Ace. The reason for this is easily understood. When the

adversaries have a long suit of which they have all the high cards, the

chances are that it will be opened; but if not, it will soon be found

unless the Declarer can at once run a suit of considerable length. When

a suit is established by the adversaries, the Declarer is put in an

embarrassing position, and would probably have been better off playing

a Trump declaration. It is a reasonable risk to trust the partner to

stop one suit, but it is being much too sanguine to expect him to

protect two. Should he fail to have either stopped, the Declarer's loss

is so heavy that only with a long and apparently established suit and

an additional Ace is the risk justified. It is realized that the case

cited, namely, Ace, King, Queen, and two others, may not prove to be an

established (or solid, as it is often called) suit. If however, the

division be at all even, as it is in the vast majority of cases, the

suit can be run, and it is cited as the minimum holding which may be

treated as established.

With the present value of Clubs and Diamonds, either suit presents an

effective original declaration. There is, therefore, much less excuse

than formerly for a reckless No-trump bid, based upon five or six Club

or Diamond tricks and one other suit stopped. When, however, an Ace of

another suit accompanies the unusual Club or Diamond strength, the

advantage of being the first to bid No-trump makes the chance worth

taking.

The hands above cited as containing the minimum strength to warrant the

call are all what are known as "weak No-trumpers." This kind of bidding

may not be conservative, but experience has shown it to be effective as

long as it is kept within the specified limits. A No-trump must,

however, justify the partner in acting upon the assumption that the

bidder has at least the stipulated strength, and it merely courts

disaster to venture such a declaration with less than the conventional

holding.

A few examples may possibly make the above somewhat more clear, as by

that means the various "minimum-strength" or "border-line" No-trumpers,

and also hands which fall just below the mark, can be accurately shown.

It will be understood that an effort is made to give the _weakest_

hands which justify the No-trump declaration, and also the hands which

fall short by the smallest possible margin. In other words, the hands

which puzzle the Declarer. With greater strength or greater weakness

the correct bid is plainly indicated.

The suits are numbered, not designated by their respective names, in

order to emphasize that it does not matter where the weakness is

located.

HANDS IN WHICH THE NO-TRUMP DECLARATION IS DOUBTFUL

Suit 1 King, Knave, X Does not contain an Ace, but is

" 2 King, X, X above the average and has four

" 3 Queen, Knave, X suits stopped. It is a No-trump

" 4 Knave, Ten, X, X bid.

Suit 1 Ace, Knave, X Has an Ace, three suits stopped,

" 2 X, X, X and a Knave over the average. It

" 3 King, X, X, X is a No-trump bid.

" 4 Queen, Knave, X

Suit 1 Ace, Queen, X Has an Ace and two face cards

" 2 King, Queen, Knave more than the average, but, not

" 3 X, X, X, X having three suits stopped, is

" 4 Knave, X, X _not_ a No-trump bid.

Suit 1 King, Queen, X Has three suits stopped, but is

" 2 King, Knave, X, X without an Ace, and is one King

" 3 Queen, Knave, X short of three King suits all with

" 4 X, X, X another face card. It is _not_

a No-trump bid.

Suit 1 King, Knave, X Has three King-Queen, or

" 2 King, Queen, X King-Knave suits. It is a No-trump

" 3 King, Knave, X bid.

" 4 X, X, X, X

Suit 1 Ace, X, X Has three suits stopped and is

" 2 Ace, X, X, X above the average. It is a No-trump

" 3 Queen, Knave, X bid.

" 4 X, X, X

Suit 1 Ace, X, X This is the border-line hand

" 2 King, X, X mentioned above. It may be a

" 3 X, X, X, X No-trump bid for an expert, but

" 4 King, Knave, X the moderate player is hardly

justified in risking it. The

presence of one or two Tens would

add materially to the strength of

this hand and make it a No-trump.

Suit 1 Ace, X, X, X Only above the average to the

" 2 King, Queen, X extent of a Queen in place of

" 3 Queen, X, X, X a Knave. No-trump is not advised

" 4 X, X unless Declarer is confident he

can outplay his adversaries.

Suit 1 Ace, Knave, X An average hand. With this holding

" 2 King, X, X only an expert is justified in

" 3 Queen, X, X, X bidding No-trump.

" 4 X, X, X

Suit 1 Ace, X, X Below the average, and, therefore,

" 2 King, X, X only "one Spade" should be bid.

" 3 Queen, X, X, X

" 4 X, X, X

Clubs } Has the weakest "solid" suit

or } Ace, King, Queen, X, X that with one other Ace warrants

Diamonds } a No-trump bid.

Suit 2 Ace, X, X

" 3 X, X, X

" 4 X, X

Clubs } Ace, King, Knave, X, X Absence of Queen in one case, and

or } or of King in the other, keeps the

Diamonds } Ace, Queen, Knave, X, X suit from being established. Even

} the presence of the additional

Suit 2 Ace, Queen, X Queen in Suit 2 does not make this

" 3 X, X, X a No-trumper.

" 4 X, X

Clubs } Absence of additional Ace makes

or } Ace, King, Queen, X, X a No-trump inadvisable.

Diamonds }

Suit 2 King, Queen, X

" 3 X, X, X

" 4 X, X

It is realized that in the last three cases cited the margin is

unusually close; the last one, should the partner happen to have either

Suit 3 or 4 stopped, and the Ace and some length of Suit 2, would be

very much stronger than the example justifying the bid. It is also true

that a fortunate drop of the King or Queen of the long suit, with a

little help from the partner, would make the next to the last the

strongest of the three. It is idle, however, to speculate on what the

partner may have. In such close cases it is most important to

invariably follow some fixed rule. The player who guesses each time may

always be wrong, while the player who sticks to the sound bid is sure

to be right most of the time. Experience has shown that, when only two

suits are stopped, it is not wise to bid No-trump without both an Ace

and a solid suit, and experience is the best teacher.

WHEN TO BID TWO NO-TRUMPS

An original bid of more than one No-trump is rarely advisable, as it is

important that the partner be given the option of bidding two of a

suit. With great strength such a call should never be made, as in that

case there is no good reason for attempting to shut out the adversary.

The only character of hand which justifies starting with two No-trumps

is the rare combination in which a long, solid suit of six or seven

Clubs or Diamonds is held, accompanied by an Ace or guarded King in at

least two of the remaining suits, the idea being to shut out adverse

Royals or Hearts.

Some players believe in bidding two No-trumps with "every Ace and not a

face," but that sort of an effort to "steal" the 100 is not justified

as the partner's hand may make a game, which could not be won at

No-trumps, obtainable in a suit declaration. A game with the incidental

score is worth much more than "one hundred Aces" and only two odd

tricks, or perchance an unfilled contract. It is also important that

the bid be limited to the one case mentioned, as in that way it gives

the most accurate information.

EXCEPTION TO THE NO-TRUMP RULE

There is one important exception to most of the No-trump bids above

described, and that is when the hand, which otherwise would be a

No-trumper, contains as its strong suit five or more Spades or Hearts.

It takes only one more Royal or Heart than it does No-trump to win the

game, and with a suit unguarded, it is far safer and wiser, with such a

holding, to bid the Heart or Royal than the No-trump. For example, with

Ace, King, Knave, and two small Clubs; King, Queen, Knave, and one

Diamond; Queen, Knave, and one Heart; and one Spade, the bid would

unquestionably be No-trump. If, however, the Club and Spade holding be

transposed, a Royal should be declared. When there is a score which

places the Club or Diamond within four tricks of game, these suits

become as valuable as the Heart or Royal, with the score at love, and

should be treated accordingly.

The Declarer should bear in mind that as the game is the desideratum,

the surest, not the most glorious or enjoyable, route of reaching it

should be chosen. When No-trump is declared with a hand containing a

defenceless suit, there is a grave chance that the adversaries may save

game by making five tricks in that suit before the Declarer can obtain

the lead. With five or more strong cards of a suit and two other suits

stopped, four tricks are more probable with the suit declaration than

three with No-trump, but three with the No-trump are more likely than

five with the suit. It, therefore, depends upon which suit be held

whether it or No-trump should be bid. The inclination which many

players have for a No-trump bid should be firmly curbed, when the

holding is of the character mentioned and the strength is in Spades or

Hearts.

A very different case arises, however, when all the suits are stopped;

the Dealer is then, the game being probable with either declaration,

justified in bidding either the No-trump or the suit, as he may prefer,

and the value of the honors he holds should be an important factor in

guiding his decision. When he has more than five Spades or Hearts, the

suit declaration is generally to be preferred, even with all suits

stopped, unless the hand contain four Aces. A few examples follow:--

Spades Ace, King, Queen, X, X While this hand contains three

Hearts Ace, Queen, X Aces, it is more apt to score

Diamonds Ace, Knave, X, X game with Royals than without a

Clubs X Trump. With the Spade and Club

or Spade and Diamond suits

transposed, it is a No-trumper.

Spades Ace, King, Queen, X Not having five Spades, this hand

Hearts Ace, Queen, X, X is a No-trump bid. The fact that

Diamonds Ace, Knave, X, X it contains a singleton is an

Clubs X argument in favor of a suit

declaration, but with only four

Spades it is safer to risk the

Clubs than long adverse Spades

with one more trick required for

game.

Spades Knave, Ten, X, X A No-trumper, as it has three

Hearts Ace, Queen, Knave suits stopped and contains an

Diamonds X Ace. A transposition of the Clubs

Clubs King, Queen, Knave, X, X to Spades or Hearts would make it

a Trump declaration.

Spades King, Queen, Knave, X, X Can be declared either Royals

Hearts Ace, Queen or No-trump, as four suits are

Diamonds Ace, X, X stopped and it has five strong

Clubs Ace, Knave, X Spades. The 30 Aces as compared

with 18 honors in Royals and the

absence of a singleton make the

No-trump more attractive. If,

however, the Ten of Spades be

substituted for a small Spade,

the 72 honors would make it a

Royal.

Spades King, Knave, X While the four Suits are stopped,

Hearts King, Queen, Ten, X, X, X the length in Hearts makes the

Diamonds Ace, X suit call the more advisable.

Clubs Ace, X

Spades King, Queen, Ten The Diamond is tempting, as a

Hearts King, Knave, Ten score of 56 honors is compared

Diamonds Ace, King, Queen, Knave with possibly 30 adverse aces.

Clubs King, Queen, Knave If, however, the three missing

Aces be held by the adversaries,

game cannot be scored in Diamonds,

and a game is always worth more

than 100. It is therefore a

No-trump.

SUIT DECLARATIONS

For some reason the Dealer is more apt to make faulty suit bids than

unwarranted No-trumpers. It seems as difficult for the old Whist and

Bridge player as it is for the novice to realize that even excessive

length does not justify an original suit call, unless the suit contain

either the Ace or the King. It, also, is just as important to remember

that if the suit does not contain _both_ the Ace and the King, the hand

must in addition have at least one other honor in the suit named,[3]

and one other sure trick. By "sure trick" in this connection is not

meant merely a suit stopped, but a trick that can be won not later than

the second round; in other words, either an Ace or a King and Queen, or

King and Knave, of the same suit.

[3] While, as a general rule, to justify an original suit

declaration, "one other honor" should accompany either Ace or

King, it is not necessary to blindly follow such a requirement to

an absurd extreme.

If the suit be headed by the Ace, either unusual length (six or

more) or considerable strength in another suit (Ace and King, or

Ace, Queen, Knave) would justify a call without "one other

honor."

If, however, the suit be headed by the King, the presence of

another honor is essential unless the length or additional

strength be extraordinary.

Stating in another way the combination of high cards requisite for an

original suit bid, it may be said that a suit should never be

originally declared unless the hand contain two sure high-card tricks,

one of which must be in the suit named. These sure high-card tricks

must be either two Aces or their equivalent in value for trick-taking

purposes. The reason is obvious. The declaration of a suit by an

informatory bidder tells the partner, not only that the bidder is

satisfied to have that hand played with the suit named as the Trump,

but also that his holding will be helpful to the extent of at least two

tricks, one of which is in his suit, should the declaration be shifted

to No-trump. This is one of the simplest and most vital rules of

bidding, yet it is probably the most frequently disregarded.

Innumerable points have appeared in the adverse honor column because a

partner has properly assumed that an original suit call showed the

high-card strength just mentioned, only to find out too late that the

bidder, with perhaps a couple of Kings, had yielded to the lure of

length. Even at the risk of seeming repetition, it is necessary to be a

little more explicit upon this subject.

When the Dealer bids a suit, he says: "Partner, I have great strength

in this suit; it is probable that I have both the Ace and King, but if

not, I have either the Ace or King, supported by at least one other

honor,[4] and the Ace or the King and Queen, or King and Knave, of some

other suit; you can bid No-trump or double any adverse declaration,

positively assured that I will support you to the extent named."

[4] See footnote, page 31.

The holding in the suit which is declared, is vital. Take, for example,

such a hand as Queen, Knave, and five small Hearts; and the Ace and

King of Clubs. Of course, the Dealer wants to play this hand with

Hearts as Trump, but he should not bid a Heart at the start, as he has

not the Ace or King. The fact that he has both the Ace and King of

Clubs does not justify a Heart call without either the Ace or King of

Hearts. With the hand cited there will be plenty of time to bid Hearts

later.

The rule which governs this case is the foundation of modern bidding;

it is without exception, is not affected by the score, and is the most

important of all Auction conventions.

Every player should resolve that, whatever his other shortcomings may

be, he will treat it as a veritable law of the Medes and Persians, and

that never, as Dealer, will he call a suit unless he hold the Ace or

King of it, and the other requisite strength.

The combination of high cards above mentioned, however, is not in

itself sufficient to justify a suit declaration. There must, in

addition, be length in the suit. This is just as essential in Clubs or

Diamonds as in Hearts or Royals. The partner may have great strength,

and yet be unable to stop the adverse suit. A No-trump being thus

eliminated, he, acting on the assurance given by the original call, may

carry the suit to high figures. This is sure to prove disastrous,

unless the original bidder has length as well as strength.

As a general rule, five is the minimum length with which a suit should

be called, but with great strength, such as Ace, King, Knave; Ace,

Queen, Knave; or King, Queen, Knave, in the suit, coupled with another

Ace; or a King and Queen, a bid with a four-card combination may be

ventured. A four-card suit, headed by Ace, King, Queen, may be called

without other strength.

A short suit, that is, one of three cards or less, should never be bid

originally, regardless of its strength. Even the holding of Ace, King,

Queen, does not justify the naming of such a suit.

While the doctrine above enunciated as to the minimum strength required

for a Trump bid is unquestionably logical and is now regarded as

conventional by a very large proportion of the expert players of

Auction, it is only natural that there should be some dissent. There is

a certain character of mind that always desires to carry any sound

theory to dangerous extremes, and, consequently, some players and

writers have seen fit, while adopting the theory which has altered the

old system of always starting with one Spade into the modern

informatory game, to advocate extensions which would practically

eliminate the defensive declaration.

These extremists desire to permit a Dealer to bid whenever he has a

long suit, regardless of whether it be headed by high cards, and also

whether it would aid a No-trump. One system suggested is that a Trump

be called whenever the Dealer holds any suit which counts 7, on the

basis of an Ace or face counting 2, and any lower card, 1. The

believers in this doctrine would, therefore, bid a Club from such a

hand as Queen, Knave, X, X, X, without any possibility of another

trick; or even from Knave, X, X, X, X, X. The absurdity of this becomes

obvious when it is remembered that the only real object in bidding a

Club or Diamond is to show strength which will justify the partner in

declaring one of the three game-going declarations. Any such holding as

that mentioned not only does not help any other declaration, but as a

matter of fact is a hand so far under the trick-taking average that, if

any method could be devised by which weakness could be emphasized more

strongly than by making the defensive declaration, such a hand would

fully justify employing it. It is difficult to conceive what benefit

can result to a partnership from any such weakness being, for the

purpose of the declaration, changed into alleged strength. If a player

declare with any such combination, his power to give information when

he really possesses strength of course immediately ceases to exist, and

the entire structure of informative bidding thereby drops to pieces.

The system of suit declarations above outlined, and upon which all that

is hereinafter suggested in relation to bidding is based, must be

followed by players who wish to give their partners accurate data, and

while it may be tempting at times to depart from the conventional, the

more frequently such exception is made by the Dealer in his bid, the

more often does misunderstanding between the partners ensue.

VARIOUS IDEAS OF THE TWO SPADE BID

Every game of the Whist family has some point upon which experts

disagree, and which, consequently, produces apparently interminable

discussion.

In Auction, it is the two Spade bid, and no less than four recognized

factions have widely divergent views concerning it. These views may be

briefly stated as follows:--

(_a_) With the border-line No-trumpers now in vogue, a hand not

strong enough to bid No-trump is too weak to warrant any call but

one Spade. The two Spade bid is, therefore, useless and should

never be made.

(_b_) The two Spade bid should be used as a No-trump invitation

with any hand not quite strong enough to justify a No-trump call.

Having this meaning it does not matter whether the hand contain any

Spade strength.

(_c_) The two Spade bid should be used as a No-trump invitation,

but must also give the additional information that the hand

contains at least one trick in Spades.

(_d_) The two Spade bid should be used to tell the partner that

the hand has the high-card strength to bid one Royal, but not

sufficient length. It thus becomes either a No-trump or Royal

invitation.

All these systems have their advocates, most of whom refuse to see

merit in any plan but their own. It is only fair, however, before

reaching a definite conclusion to accord to all a fair and

dispassionate consideration.

(_a_)

The argument that, as long as light No-trumpers are conventional, any

hand not sufficiently strong to call No-trump is too weak to justify

declaring more than one Spade, has considerable force. Beyond question,

many followers of plans "_b_" and "_c_" call two Spades when their

holdings do not warrant such action, but the fact that a declaration is

at times abused is far from being a sufficient reason for wiping it off

the Auction map, and saying to those who desire to use it rationally,

"No, because some players see fit to make this bid with two Knaves and

a Queen, it is not safe to allow you the privilege of using it sanely,

wisely, and at the appropriate time."

The supporters of "_a_," however, go further, and say that the hands in

which a No-trump cannot be called, but with which the invitation should

be extended to the partner to bid it, are so rare that the retention of

the two Spade call merely encumbers the catalogue of the Declarer with

a bid that is practically obsolete.

This, if it be true, would be most convincing, but it is so surprising

a statement that it should be examined before being accepted.

Every hand that class "_d_" would bid two Spades would be similarly

called by "_b_" and "_c_," and at least ninety-nine per cent. of

expert Auction players concede that such a bid is sound. For example:--

Spades Ace, King, Knave

Hearts X, X, X, X

Diamonds X, X, X

Clubs Ace, Queen, X

has strength which deserves, if possible, to be shown.

This is merely a sample of a hand which would be a Royal, if length in

Spades accompanied the strength. Such hands come within the "_d_"

classification, and are not rare. This must be admitted when it is

considered that three- or four-card suits are much more frequently held

than suits of greater length. Therefore, two Spades should be bid more

often than one Royal. With the single exception of No-trump, Royals is

the call most frequently played; consequently, as a preliminary call,

two Spades must be used more constantly than any declaration, except

No-trump.

Experience bears out this argument, and it, therefore, seems that the

"_a_" allegations are not supported by examination.

It is obvious that the more original calls with which it is possible to

equip a Dealer, the more accurately can he distinguish for the benefit

of his partner between the different classes of holdings. It therefore

seems absurd to contend that the bid of two spades should be

eliminated.

(_b_)

The argument presented by the "_b_" school is also at first quite

convincing. Take such a hand as

Spades X, X, X

Hearts Ace, X, X

Diamonds King, Knave, X

Clubs Knave, X, X, X

It is just too weak for a No-trump, but at first glance seems too

strong for a Spade.

Why, however, should it be too strong for a Spade? It is under the

average, which means the holding of the partner must be quite a bit

better than the average to get one odd. If he have such a hand he will

declare it in any event, and the dealer can then help. Furthermore,

this system does not point out any one suit as stopped, and, therefore,

gives the minimum degree of information. It is practically saying, "I

bid half a No-trump." It is quite doubtful whether the holding

essential for such a bid can be properly limited and whether it will

not tempt bidding with too great weakness.

Furthermore, it must be taken out. The Third Hand cannot allow his

partner to play two Spades, and if he be weak, all he can do under this

system is to call three Spades, which only makes matters worse, as it

is sure to be doubled, and the dealer must in turn take that out. To do

this with the hand above cited, he must either call two Clubs with four

to a Knave, or one Diamond with three to the King, Knave.

The trouble is evident--the result apt to be unfortunate. If the

partner with average strength accept such a No-trump invitation, the

contract cannot be fulfilled; while if he be strong, he will bid in any

event, so where is the advantage of the call?

For one purpose, however, this system of bid seems sound. If the dealer

be a poor player and the Third Hand an expert, it is for the benefit of

the partnership that the Third Hand be the Declarer. When the Dealer

holds a real No-trumper, but wishes his partner to become the Declarer,

the two Spade,--not invitation, but command,--has real merit, but as

few players either concede their own inferiority or are willing to

allow their partners to play a majority of the hands, this apparent

argument in favor of the plan will not appeal to many, and will,

therefore, seldom prove of service.

(_c_)

This comes nearer being logical, as it shows one Spade trick, and,

therefore, indicates help for a partner's Royal, but with that

exception, it is subject to the same objections as "_b_." It is

troublesome to take out, and when compared with "_d_" gives extremely

limited information.

It may, however, be of distinct advantage for a player who does not

approve of light No-trumpers. Followers of the theory that the call

of one No-trump means four or five sure tricks will certainly find

"_c_" or even "_b_" an advantageous system, but the advantage of

"getting to the No-trump first" is so manifest that the light

declarations have become generally popular, and but few of the

"I-will-not-declare-unless-I-have-the-'goods'" bidders are now to be

found.

If a player believe in calling No-trump with the minimum strength now

considered sufficient, he has little use for either "_b_" or "_c_."

It is self-evident that "_c_" cannot be used as often as "_b_," so the

Declarer who likes always to say something will prefer "_b_," but the

bidder who wishes, when he calls, to have distinct value attached to

his announcement, will elect in favor of "_c_" rather than "_b_," and

for the same reason will find "_d_" the best system of all.

(_d_)

It is toward this system that the evolution of modern bidding is

turning. True, two Spades cannot be declared as frequently when "_d_"

is used as when "_b_" or "_c_" is employed, but the "_d_" bid conveys

information so comprehensive and important that one call is of greater

value than several "_b_" or "_c_" bids, which, at best, furnish the

partner with indefinite data.

It makes the weakness take-out of the partner, namely, one Royal, easy

and logical, and in every way seems the soundest, safest, simplest, and

most conducive to game-winning of all the plans suggested.

It invites equally the two most important declarations, makes easy the

position of the partner when he holds long, weak Spades, and is

doubtless destined, in a short time, to be the only two-Spade system

in use, unless it be found advisable to include in the repertory of

the original declarer both "_b_" and "_d_."

This can be readily accomplished by calling two Spades for "_b_"; three

Spades for "_d_"; and four Spades for the combination hereinafter

given, for which the declaration of three Spades is suggested.

No serious objection can be advanced to this plan, except that it is

somewhat complicated, and for a light No-trump bidder, possibly

unnecessary. It is a totally new idea, but believed to be of sufficient

value to entitle it to a trial.

As it is impossible to declare or play intelligently when any doubt

exists between partners regarding the convention employed, and as it is

wise not to follow unsound theories, no further reference will be made

to "_a_," "_b_," or "_c_" plans. The "_d_" system will be fully

described, and all suggestions that hereinafter appear will be based

upon the supposition that it is being used.

THE TWO SPADE BID[5]

The bid of two Spades is a showing of Spade strength, with a hand which

does not contain Spade length sufficient to justify the bid of one

Royal.

[5] See page 89, as to how the partner should treat this

declaration; also table on pages 68 and 69.

The latter is the more advantageous declaration, and should be made

whenever five Spades with the requisite high-card strength are held.

When, however, the hand contains the strength, but not the length, for

a Royal call, the bid of two Spades is a most useful substitute.

It may be made with three or four Spades in any case in which, with

five, one Royal could be declared, except the solitary instance of

holding Ace and King of Spades without another trick of any kind. A

Royal may be called with five, headed by Ace, King, as, should the bid

stand, the three small Trumps would surely take one trick. Every

original offensive declaration is based upon a minimum of three tricks.

This principle applies to the bid of two Spades, and, therefore, a hand

containing less than five Spades, headed by Ace, King, and no other

winning card, is a one Spade call, as it is one and one-quarter tricks

below the average.

When a player bids two Spades, he sends his partner a message which

gives information about as follows: "I have three or four Spades with

two or three high honors, and in addition, unless I have Ace, King, and

Queen of Spades, I have one other suit well stopped. My hand does not

warrant a No-trump, because I have only two suits stopped. As I have

not more than four Spades, I do not wish to bid a Royal; I am too

strong to be satisfied with one Spade, so I bid two for the purpose of

encouraging you to call No-trump or Royals."

Such a declaration certainly gives very accurate information, and

should be used whenever such a hand occurs, but not under any other

circumstances.

THE THREE SPADE BID[6]

The declaration of three Spades by the Dealer is a very recent idea and

is also most informatory. It says: "Partner, I am anxious to have

Royals the Trump, but I cannot make that declaration now, as I have not

the requisite high cards. I probably have not the Ace of Spades, and

the chances are that I am without the King also. Either because the

balance of my hand is so strong that I fear I will be left in with one

Spade, or for some other reason, I do not wish to open with the

defensive declaration and wait for a later round to show strength. You

can count on me for five or more (probably more) Spades and other

strength."

[6] See page 90, as to how the partner should treat this

declaration.

WHEN TO BID TWO IN EITHER ROYALS OR HEARTS

Another case to consider in bidding by the Dealer is when more than one

of any game-scoring suit should be declared.

The original theory of declaration was to withhold from the table as

long as possible all information regarding the strength of the hand;

therefore, to start with one in the real suit was regarded as most

unwise, and to bid two would have been deemed the act of a lunatic.

Now, however, the original suit declaration of more than one is

generally acknowledged to be an important part of the finesse of the

skilled bidder, and such bidding, when justified by the hand, is

recognized as eminently wise and proper.

When the "two" and "three" original Trump bids first came into vogue,

they were used indiscriminately with great length, regardless of

whether or not high cards headed the suit. The meaning of the bid was

"Do not take me out," and it was made under widely divergent

conditions. No distinction was drawn between a hand which might be

trickless as an aid to, or defense against, a No-trump declaration, and

one which would produce seven or eight tricks under such circumstances.

This kind of bidding was found to be much too confusing for the

partner, and prevented him from rendering intelligent support.

It is now realized that it is far wiser with length, no matter how

great, but without commanding cards, to start with a Spade and then bid

the long suit on the succeeding round, thus practically photographing

the hand for the partner and energetically waving the red flag for any

declaration but the one suit.

Take, for example, such a hand as seven Hearts, headed by Queen, Knave;

Ace, Knave, and two Clubs; two small Diamonds, and no Spades. An

original two Heart or one Club call would grossly mislead the partner

without being of any real advantage, but one Spade followed by two

Hearts, or even three, if necessary, shows the exact situation. As long

as the hand containing a long suit is not so strong that there is grave

danger of its being left in with one Spade, it should be started with

the defensive declaration. When such great strength exists, a sound

opening bid invariably presents itself.

It, therefore, becomes apparent that an original suit bid of two or

three, just as necessarily as a bid of one, should demonstrate the

underlying principle of original suit declarations--namely, strength,

as well as length.

The incidental object in bidding more than one originally is to warn

the partner that the Dealer prefers to play the suit named rather than

a doubtful No-trump; the main reason, however, is, if possible, to shut

out adverse bidding. When there is great length in either Spades or

Hearts and distinct weakness in the other, a two or three bid is most

advisable. In that case, the strength in the other suit may be entirely

with the adversaries and may be divided between them. They could

readily find this out, if allowed to start with a cheap bid, but it

frequently happens that neither is sufficiently strong to make a high

declaration without assistance from his partner.

When the Dealer has sufficient strength in either Royals or Hearts to

bid more than one, and, in addition, has considerable strength in the

other suits, it is as a rule advisable to bid but one, as in that case

he does not wish to frighten off adverse bidding, but prefers to

encourage it with the hope that it may reach a point which will give

him a safe and profitable double.

Six sure tricks with the possibility of more is the minimum strength

for an original call of two Hearts or two Royals.

WHEN TO BID THREE IN EITHER ROYALS OR HEARTS

An original bid of three Royals or Hearts is justified by a hand in

which sufficient strength exists to make it probable that the

declaration will be successful, and which nevertheless cannot

effectively defend against a high bid by the adversaries in the other

suit. As a rule this is a two-suit hand, and in a genuine two-suiter it

often happens that one side may be able to win eleven tricks in Royals

or Hearts, while their adversaries can capture a similar number in the

other.

The three bid is, of course, a "shut-out" measure, and should be

employed for that purpose only.

Seven sure tricks, with the possibility of more, is the minimum

strength for an original call of three Hearts or three Royals.

THE TWO BID IN DIAMONDS OR CLUBS

The original bid of two in either Diamonds or Clubs with the score at

love is a totally different character of declaration from two Hearts or

two Royals. The Dealer does not with this declaration say, "Let me stay

in and make game," but he does say, "I have a long suit (at least five

cards) headed by Ace, King, Queen, with no considerable support on the

side. (If I had another Ace, I would bid No-trump.) Now you know my

exact hand."

When there is a score which places Diamonds or Clubs within four tricks

of game, the original bid of two or more in either suit is of exactly

the same significance as a similar call of Royals or Hearts, with the

score at love.

HOW TO DECLARE TWO-SUIT HANDS

The only remaining case of original declaration by the Dealer is the

hand with two suits, both of which are of sufficient strength to bid.

As a general rule, it is wiser first to call the lower in value, and

then to declare the higher on the next round. This gives the maximum

amount of information, but should only be attempted when the hand

clearly indicates that there will be another opportunity to bid, as

otherwise the Dealer may be left in with a non-game-producing

declaration.

The Dealer must determine from the composition of his hand whether a

second opportunity to bid is assured. When he is not very strong, the

chances are that some one else will declare. When he is without a suit

or has a singleton, it is a reasonably safe assumption that some one

will be strong enough in that suit to call it.

A few examples follow of hands which have the minimum strength to

justify the various Trump calls and also of hands which, by a small

margin, fall short:--

HANDS IN WHICH A TRUMP DECLARATION IS DOUBTFUL

Spades Ace, King, X, X, X Has five Spades headed by Ace

Hearts X, X, X and King. With Royals Trump has

Diamonds X, X, X two high-card tricks, and can

Clubs X, X take at least one with small

cards. It is, therefore, a one

Royal bid.

Spades King, X, X, X Has not high-card strength

Hearts King, Knave, X, X, X sufficient for either a Heart or

Diamonds X, X two-Spade bid. One Spade is the

Clubs X, X correct call.

Spades X, X Complies with all the requirements

Hearts King, Queen, X, X, X of a Heart bid.

Diamonds Ace, Knave, X

Clubs X, X, X

Spades X, X, X Has only four Hearts; is,

Hearts King, Queen, X, X therefore, a one Spade call.

Diamonds Ace, Knave, X

Clubs X, X, X

Spades X, X, X Has only four Hearts, but has

Hearts Ace, Queen, Knave, X sufficient high-card strength

Diamonds Ace, Queen, X to justify a Heart bid.

Clubs X, X, X

Spades Ace, Queen, X, X A two Spade bid; with one more

Hearts X, X, X Spade, it would be one Royal.

Diamonds Ace, X, X

Clubs X, X, X

Spades Ace, Knave, X A two Spade bid. With two more

Hearts X, X, X, Spades, it would be one Royal.

Diamonds King, Queen, X

Clubs X, X, X, X

Spades Ace, Knave, X, X Either two Spades or one Club

Hearts X, X could be bid, but the Club is

Diamonds X, X distinctly preferable.

Clubs Ace, Queen, Knave, X, X

Spades King, X, X, X A one Spade bid, as it has not

Hearts Ace, X, X two honors in Spades.

Diamonds Knave, X, X

Clubs Knave, X, X

Spades Queen, Knave, Ten, X, X, A three Spade bid; cannot be

X, X started as a Royal without Ace

Hearts Ace, Queen or King, and so strong, one Spade

Diamonds King, Knave, X might not be overbid.

Clubs King

Spades None A two or three Heart bid.

Hearts Ace, King, Knave, Ten, X, X

Diamonds Queen, Knave, Ten

Clubs Ace, X, X, X

Spades Ace, King A one Heart bid. So strong that

Hearts Ace, King, Knave, Ten, a higher call is unnecessary, as

X, X adverse bidding is desired.

Diamonds Queen, Knave, Ten

Clubs King, Queen

Spades Ace, King, Knave, Ten, A three Royals bid. Important to

X, X, X shut out adverse bidding.

Hearts None

Diamonds X, X

Clubs Ace, King, X, X

Spades X, X A two Diamonds bid.

Hearts King, X, X

Diamonds Ace, King, Queen, X, X,

X

Clubs X, X

Spades Ace, King, Knave, X, X Should either be bid one Club

Hearts X and subsequently Royals, or

Diamonds X, X started at two Royals to shut out

Clubs Ace, King, X, X, X other bidding.

Spades King, X While this hand has more than

Hearts Ace, King, Queen sufficient high-card strength to

Diamonds X, X, X, X justify an offensive bid, it is only

Clubs X, X, X, X a Spade. Two Spades would mislead

the partner as to length and

strength of Spades and might

induce him to bid high Royals; one

Heart would mislead him as to

length of Hearts; having, however,

called one Spade, the hand can

advance any declaration of the

partner and if the partner bid

either Clubs or Diamonds, can call

No-trump.

Spades King, Knave, X, X, X, Should not be bid one Royal, as

X, X that deceives partner as to

Hearts X, X high-card strength; two Spades

Diamonds X, X invites a No-trump, which is not

Clubs X, X wanted. Either three Spades or

one Spade should be called. The

hand, outside of Spades, is so

weak that the latter is the wiser

bid.

Spades Queen, Ten, X, X Spade honors are too weak for two

Hearts Ace, X, X Spades. One Spade is the only

Diamonds X, X, X sound bid.

Clubs X, X, X

Spades X One Club should be bid, followed,

Hearts Queen, Knave, Ten, X, regardless of the partner's

X, X, X declaration, with Hearts.

Diamonds None

Clubs Ace, King, X, X, X

Spades Queen, Knave, Ten, X, Three Spades, and on the next

X, X round, Hearts, unless the partner

Hearts King, Knave, Ten, X, has bid _two_ Royals.

X, X

Diamonds None

Clubs X

Spades Knave, Ten, Nine, X, X, X This very interesting hand affords

Hearts None a number of correct original bids.

Diamonds Ace, Knave, X One Club, three Spades, and one

Clubs Ace, Queen, Knave, X Spade are all sound; the latter

is not apt to be left in, as a

Heart call is most probable, the

long hand in that suit containing

at least five. Three Suits being

stopped, with more than an average

hand, one No-trump is also

technically correct. The chances

are, however, that the hand will

produce better results if the

Trump be Royals, and as the call

of one No-trump may stand, it is

not wise to open the bidding that

way. Three Spades seems the most

advisable declaration, as it gives

the information most important for

the partner to receive. The risk

in calling one Spade, while

slight, is totally unnecessary,

and one Club does not warn the

partner not to bid Hearts, if he

have anything in Spades.

Should three Spades be called and

the partner declare one Heart, the

dealer on the next round could try

No-trump, but one Club, followed

by one Heart from partner, would

necessitate a Royal from the

dealer, as the absence of Spades

in the partner's hand is not then

announced.

In the event of the small Club

being transposed to a Diamond, so

that the hand contain four

Diamonds and three Clubs, three

Spades would unquestionably be the

most advantageous original call.

III

SECOND HAND DECLARATIONS

The Second Hand bids under two totally dissimilar conditions. The

Dealer of necessity has declared and, either by a call of one Spade,

shown comparative weakness, or, by an offensive declaration, given

evidence of strength.

It is obvious that whether the Dealer be strong or weak materially

affects the question of how the Second Hand should bid, as it makes

quite a variation in the number of tricks he has the right to expect to

find in his partner's hand. This, however, is not the only, and,

possibly, not the most important difference.

When the Dealer has called one Spade, it is practically certain, should

the Second Hand pass, that he will have another opportunity to enter

the bidding. When, however, the Dealer has declared a suit or No-trump,

it is possible, if the Second Hand fail to declare, that no other bid

will be made, and the declaration of the Dealer will stand.

It is, therefore, readily seen that, in the first case, the Second Hand

is making an initial declaration; in the other, a forced bid.

BIDDING OVER ONE SPADE

When Auction was in its infancy, the authorities advised the Second

Hand, regardless of the character of his cards, to pass a declaration

of one Spade. The reason given was that the Third Hand would have to

take his partner out, which might prove embarrassing, and that a bid by

the Second Hand would release his left-hand adversary from this,

possibly, trying position.

Modern Auction developments have proven the futility of this idea. The

Third Hand of to-day is not troubled by any obligation to take the

Dealer out of "one Spade," and will not do so without considerable

strength. Should the Second Hand pass, with winning cards, the Fourth

Hand may be the player who finds himself in the awkward position, and

if, adopting the conservative course, he allow the Spade declaration to

stand, a good chance to score game may be lost by the failure of the

Second Hand to avail himself of his opportunity.

Second Hand silence is not now regarded as golden, but there is still

some question as to the amount of strength required to make a

declaration advisable. Some authorities believe the Second Hand should

pass, unless his cards justify him in expecting to make game. This

theory was for a time very generally accepted, and even yet has a

considerable following. Experience, however, has convinced most of its

advocates that it is unsound, and it is being rapidly abandoned.

It is now conceded that the deal is quite an advantage, because of the

opportunity it gives the Dealer to strike the first blow. It follows

that when the Dealer has been obliged to relinquish his favorable

position, it is the height of folly for the Second Hand, when he has

the requisite strength, not to grasp it. Furthermore, the Dealer having

shown weakness, the adverse strength is probably in the Third Hand.

Should the Third Hand call No-trump, the Fourth Hand will be the

leader, and it will then be important for him to know which suit his

partner desires opened. On the first round of the declaration, this can

be indicated by a bid of one, but after the No-trump, it takes two,

which, with the strength over the bidder, may be dangerous.

The bid of the Second Hand, furthermore, makes the task of his

left-hand adversary more difficult and may prevent a No-trump. It

certainly aids the Fourth Hand--indeed, it may be just the information

he needs for a game declaration.

It seems clear, therefore, that the Second Hand should show his

strength when he has the chance. He should not, however, carry too far

the principles above outlined. It is just as fatal for the Second Hand

as for the Dealer, to deceive his partner.

WHEN TO BID NO-TRUMP

The rules governing an original offensive bid by the Dealer apply to

the Second Hand, after the Dealer has called one Spade, in practically

every instance. The only possible exception is the holding necessary

for a border-line No-trump. When the Dealer, with the minimum strength,

declares "one No-trump," he figures on the probability that his partner

holds one-third of the high cards not in his own hand. When the Second

Hand declares after "one Spade," it is reasonable for him to count upon

his partner for a slightly greater percentage of strength; therefore,

he may bid No-trump a little more freely.

To justify a No-trump by the Dealer, he should have slightly better

than average cards. The Second Hand, with exactly an average holding,

may make the bid. The No-trump requirements,--namely, four suits

stopped, three suits stopped and an Ace, three King-Queen or King-Knave

suits, or at least five solid Diamonds or Clubs and an Ace,--which

limit the declaration of the Dealer, apply, however, with equal force

to the Second Hand, and should never be disregarded.

WHEN TO MAKE A TRUMP DECLARATION

The Dealer, having declared one Spade, a Trump declaration of one, two,

or three by the Second Hand is subject to exactly the same rules as in

the case of the original call by the Dealer. Precisely the same

reasoning holds good and the same danger is apt to arise, should the

Second Hand digress from the recognized principles of safety, and bid a

long suit which does not contain the requisite high cards. The Second

Hand will have an opportunity to declare his weak suit of great length

on the next round, and there is no necessity for deceiving the partner

as to its composition by jumping into it with undue celerity.

THE DOUBLE OF ONE SPADE

The question of when the Second Hand should double is covered in the

chapter on "Doubling," but as the double of one Spade is really a

declaration, rather than a double, it seems proper to consider it here,

especially as it is of vital importance that it be accurately

distinguished from the Second Hand bid of two Spades, with which it is

very frequently confused. Many good players treat the two declarations

as synonymous, although by so doing they fail to avail themselves of a

simple and safe opportunity to convey valuable information. The reason

for this apparent carelessness on the part of many bidders is that no

scheme of declaring that accurately fits the situation has hitherto

been generally understood.

The idea that follows has been found to work well, and while as yet not

sufficiently used to be termed conventional, seems to be growing in

favor with such rapidity that its general adoption in the near future

is clearly indicated.

The Second Hand doubles one Spade, with practically the same holding

with which the dealer bids two Spades, not with the expectation or wish

that the double will stand, but as the most informatory action

possible, and as an invitation to his partner to bid No-trumps or

Royals. In a general way his bid of two Spades has the same

significance, except that it more emphatically suggests a call of

Royals. By accurately distinguishing the two, the partner may declare

with much greater effect.

The double shows short Spades (two or three), with at least two high

honors in Spades, and one other trick, or the Ace of Spades and two

other tricks.

THE BID OF TWO SPADES[7]

The bid of two Spades shows exactly four Spades and the same high-card

holding which justifies doubling one Spade.

[7] See Bid of Two Spades by Dealer, page 47.

The Second Hand, when he doubles one, or bids two Spades, says: "I have

not three suits stopped, so I cannot bid No-trumps. While I have

sufficient high-card strength to call one Royal, I have less than five

Spades, and, therefore, am without sufficient length. I can, however,

by this declaration, tell you the exact number of my Spades, and I

expect you to make the best possible use of the exceptionally accurate

information with which you are furnished."

As much care should be taken in selecting the correct declaration, when

in doubt whether to bid two Spades or double one, as when determining

whether to call a Royal or a Heart. Many a player doubles one Spade

with five or six, headed by Knave, Ten, apparently never realizing that

with such a hand he wishes the trump to be Royals, and yet, by his bid,

is inviting his partner to call No-trump; or he bids two Spades with

the Queen of Spades and a couple of Kings, and after his partner has

declared a Royal, or doubled an adverse No-trump, counting on the

announced Spade strength, says: "I realize I deceived you in the

Spades, but I had two Kings about which you did not know."

That sort of a declarer makes it impossible for his partner to take

full advantage of any sound bid he may make.

Every Second Hand bidder should remember that when he doubles one Spade

or bids two, he tells his partner he has short or exactly four Spades,

as the case may be; that he has not three suits stopped, and that his

minimum high-card holding is one of the following combinations:--

SPADES MINIMUM STRENGTH IN OTHER SUIT

Ace, King, Queen No strength required

Ace, King Queen, Knave, and one other

Ace, Queen King, Knave

Ace, Knave Ace, or King and Queen, or King, Knave, Ten

Ace Ace and King; Ace, Queen, Knave; or King,

Queen, Knave

King, Queen Ace, or King and Queen, or King, Knave, Ten

King, Knave, Ten Ace, or King and Queen, or King, Knave, Ten

King, Knave Ace and King; Ace, Queen, Knave; or King,

Queen, Knave

Queen, Knave, Ten Ace and King; Ace, Queen, Knave; or King,

Queen, Knave

In order that the distinction between the various Second Hand Spade

declarations may be clearly marked, take such a holding as

Spades Ace, King

Hearts Three small

Diamonds Four small

Clubs Ace

Only ten cards are mentioned, and the remaining three are either Spades

or Clubs.

_When Making the The Second

the missing number of Hand

cards are Spades in the Hand should_

All Clubs Two Double

Two Clubs and one Spade Three Double

One Club and two Spades Four Bid two Spades

All Spades Five Bid one Royal

The method suggested above is not the only plan for distinguishing

between the double of one and the bid of two Spades.

Some players think the double should mean a No-trump invitation,

without any significance as to strength in the Spade suit, and two

Spades should show two honors in Spades. The same comment applies to

this as to a similar declaration by the Dealer; namely, that with the

light No-trumpers now conventional, the invitation without Spade

strength is unnecessary and possibly dangerous.

Those, however, who wish to have the privilege of issuing such an

invitation, are not obliged to deprive themselves of the undoubted and

material advantage of being able, when strong in Spades, to distinguish

between a holding of short Spades (two or three) and of exactly four.

They can convey to their partners that very important information by

using the following system:--

THE BID THE MEANING

Double of one Spade A No-trump invitation. No information

as to Spade strength

Two Spades Short Spades with two high honors

and one other trick

Three Spades Four Spades with two high honors and

one other trick

Four Spades Same as bid of three Spades described

immediately below

This system is entirely new, is somewhat complicated, and is suggested

for what it is worth for those who wish, without Spade strength, to

invite a No-trump.

As the bid of four Spades can be taken out by the partner with one

Royal, the system is not subject to objection, on the ground that four

Spades forces the partner to an unduly high declaration. The scheme is,

as yet, merely an experiment, and of doubtful value except for the

purpose of enabling a poor player to place with an expert partner the

responsibility of the play.

It is not hereinafter referred to, but the suggestions made regarding

Third and Fourth Hand bidding can be readily adapted to comply with its

self-evident requirements.

THE BID OF THREE SPADES[8]

The bid of three Spades when made by the Second Hand shows a holding of

at least five (probably six) Spades, almost certainly without the Ace

and probably without the King, but with some side strength. It says, "I

want this hand played with Royals as the Trump, but I cannot bid that

suit now, as I have not the requisite high-card holding. Either because

the rest of my hand is so strong that I fear neither the Third Hand nor

my partner can bid, or for some other good reason, I prefer now, rather

than later, to give my partner all possible information."

[8] See page 123 as to how the partner should treat this

declaration.

This system of bidding differentiates most accurately between the

various lengths of Spade holdings and enables the partner to elect

between No-trump and Royals, with an exact knowledge of the situation

not otherwise obtainable.

HOW SECOND HAND SHOULD BID AFTER AN OFFENSIVE DECLARATION

When the Dealer has made an offensive declaration, the Second Hand must

bear in mind that it is possible this may be his last opportunity to

declare. A declaration under such circumstances being what is very

properly termed "forced," is of a totally different character from the

"free" declaration heretofore considered, and is not limited by any

hard-and-fast rules as to the presence of certain cards. For example,

should the Dealer bid one Royal, and the Second Hand hold seven Hearts,

headed by Queen, Knave, he obviously must declare two Hearts; otherwise,

even if the Fourth Hand hold the Ace and King of Hearts, and other

strength, the declaration of one Royal might stand.

The principle is that an offensive bid having been made, the

declaration of the player following does not of necessity show high

cards, but does suggest the ability of the Declarer to successfully

carry out the proposed contract.

When the Dealer has called a No-trump, the Second Hand is obliged

either to pass, or declare two of some suit, or of No-trump. He must

remember that against the Dealer's No-trump he is the leader, and as

the information regarding his strong suit will be given to his partner

by the first card played, it is not important that he convey it by a

bid.

The No-trump may be only of minimum strength, but it may, on the other

hand, be of much more than average calibre. The Third Hand has yet to

be heard from, and if, as is possible, he have considerable strength in

the suit that the Second Hand thinks of declaring, such a bid will

offer an ideal opportunity for a profitable double. The Second Hand,

therefore, should be somewhat diffident about bidding two in a suit. He

should make the declaration only when his hand is so strong that in

spite of the No-trump, there seems to be a good chance of scoring game,

or he has reason to think he can force and defeat an adverse two

No-trumps, or the No-trump bidder is a player who considers it the part

of weakness to allow his declaration to be easily taken away, and can,

therefore, be forced to dangerous heights.

This is an opportunity for the Second Hand to use all his judgment. The

Dealer may be taking desperate chances with a weak No-trumper, and the

balance of strength may be with his partner and himself, in which case

it is important for him now to show his colors; yet he must always keep

in mind that conservatism, in the long run, is the main factor of

Auction success. It is the ability (possibly "instinct" is the proper

term) to act wisely in such cases that makes a bidder seem inspired.

With a strong Club or Diamond holding and a reentry, such a hand as,

for example,--

Spades Two small

Hearts Two small

Diamonds King, Queen, Knave, and two small

Clubs Ace, Knave, Ten, Nine

it is generally unwise to bid Second Hand over one No-trump.

There is little danger of the adversaries going game in No-trumps, but

they may easily do so in Hearts or Royals. A Second Hand declaration in

this position may point out to the opponents their safest route to

game, and is not apt to prove of material benefit, as with such hand,

eleven tricks against a No-trump is extremely improbable.

A similar principle presents itself when the holding is five of any

suit, headed by the four top honors, or even by the three top honors,

and no other strength. With such cards, the No-trump can almost

certainly be kept from going game, and if the partner be able to

assist, the declaration may be defeated. If, however, two of that suit

be called, the adversaries, not having it stopped, will not advance the

No-trump, but if sufficiently strong, will declare some other suit in

which they may score game.

THE SHIFT

Holding six or more of a suit, headed by Ace, King, Queen, some writers

have very properly called it an Auction "crime" to double. The question

arises, however, "What should the Second Hand do under such

circumstances?" A bid of two in his solid suit will eliminate any

chance of the No-trump being continued, and an adverse call of two

No-trumps is just what the holder of the solid suit most desires, as he

can double with comparative safety, being assured both of the success

of the double and of the improbability that the Declarer will be able

to take himself out.

There has been suggested to meet this emergency a declaration called

the "Shift." It consists in bidding two of a suit in which the Declarer

has little or no strength. For this purpose a suit of lower value than

the solid suit, should, if possible, be selected. The theory of the bid

is that either the original No-trump declarer or his partner, having

the suit securely stopped, will bid two No-trumps and that the double

can then be effectively produced. The advocates of the Shift urge that

should the worst happen, and the declaration be doubled, the player

making it can then shift (this situation giving the declaration its

name) to his real suit, and that no harm will ensue.

The trouble is that a double under such circumstances is not the worst

that can happen. When the Shift was first suggested, players were not

familiar with nor on the lookout for it. Success, or at least the

absence of failure, therefore, often attended its use. Now, however, it

is generally understood, and players will not either overbid or double

a declarer they suspect of it. They merely allow him to meet his doom

attempting, with weak Trumps, to win eight tricks against an adverse

No-trumper.

While, therefore, at long intervals and under advantageous circumstances,

the Shift may be successfully utilized, against experienced players it

is a dangerous expedient, especially for any one known to be fond of

that character of declaration.

The conservative and safe course to follow with a holding of the

character described is to pass the one No-trump.

WHEN TO BID TWO NO-TRUMPS OVER ONE NO-TRUMP

The bid of two No-trumps over one No-trump is a more or less spectacular

performance, that appeals to those fond of the theatrical. There are

some hands that justify it, but it is safe to say that in actual play

it is tried far more frequently than Second Hand holdings warrant.

Such a bid may be made with a strong suit--not of great length--and the

three other suits safely stopped, with the four suits stopped twice,

with a long solid Club or Diamond suit and two other suits stopped, or

with some similar, and, under the circumstances, equally unusual

combination.

HOW TO BID AGAINST TWO OR THREE SPADES

With two Spades bid by the Dealer, if the Second Hand have a suit he

desires led against a No-trump, it is of the utmost importance that he

indicate it to his partner.

Under such conditions, the Second Hand should declare a suit headed by

King, Queen, Knave, or some similar combination, but should avoid

bidding a long, weak suit, as the No-trump declarer may hold Ace, Queen

of it, and the partner may, by the call, be invited to lead his King

into the jaws of death. Of course, if the hand contain reentries, it

may be advisable to make such a bid, although even then it may

advantageously be delayed until the second round, since against a two

Spade declaration the Second Hand is sure of having another opportunity

to speak.

With three Spades declared by the Dealer, the Second Hand expects a

Royal from the Third Hand. He knows that he will have another chance to

bid, but, as he will then probably have to go much higher, it is just

as well not to wait if the hand contain any advantageous declaration.

WHEN TO BID NO-TRUMP OVER A SUIT

The question of what amount of strength warrants the Second Hand in

bidding one No-trump, after a suit has been declared by the Dealer, is

somewhat difficult to accurately answer. It goes without saying that to

justify a No-trump under such circumstances, the Second Hand must have

much better than merely an average holding. The suit that the Dealer

has bid should be safely stopped, and when the declarer has only one

trick in that suit, at least four other tricks should be in sight.

Occasionally cases arise in which the Second Hand may bid one No-trump

over a suit declaration without the suit that has been declared being

stopped, but these are rare and such a call should only be made with

unusual strength, as it gives the partner the right to assume that the

adverse suit is stopped and he may consequently advance the No-trump to

dangerous figures.

It is probably a good rule that a No-trump should not be called over a

declared suit, that suit not being stopped, with a holding of less than

six sure tricks. Even with one stopper in the suit bid, it is generally

better to declare either Royals or Hearts in preference to No-trump,

provided the hand contain sufficient length and strength to warrant

such declaration.

IV

THIRD HAND DECLARATIONS

Third Hand declarations can best be considered by dividing them into

three classes:--

1. When the Dealer has called one Spade, and the Second Hand passed.

2. When the Dealer has made an offensive declaration, and the Second

Hand passed.

3. When the Second Hand has declared.

The distinction between these three situations is so clearly drawn that

each is really a separate and distinct subject. They will be taken up

_seriatim_.

WHEN THE DEALER HAS CALLED ONE SPADE, AND THE SECOND HAND PASSED

In the old days, when the Dealer's "one Spade" was without significance,

the Third Hand was always obliged to declare, in order to give the

Dealer the opportunity to get back into the game, as it was possible

that he had great strength. Now the Third Hand recognizes that there is

not the least obligation upon him to bid, and that it is inadvisable

for him to do so unless his hand be so strong that, even with a weak

partner, game is in sight, or unless it be important for him to

indicate to the Dealer what to lead if the Fourth Hand make the final

declaration.

Should the Third Hand pass, and the Fourth Hand also pass, allowing the

one Spade declaration to stand, the liability of the Declarer cannot

exceed 100 points, but if the Third Hand bid, the liability becomes

unlimited. While the Dealer and Second Hand both have the right to

assume that their partners have an average percentage of the remaining

cards, the Third Hand is not justified in any such presumption, after

the Dealer, by bidding one Spade, has virtually waved the red flag.

True it is, a similar warning has appeared on the right, but if both

danger signals are to be believed, the only inference is that the

strength is massed on the left. The bidding by the Third Hand must,

therefore, be of a very different character from that of the Dealer or

Second Hand. He should not venture a No-trump unless he have four sure

tricks with the probability of more and at least three suits stopped.

When in doubt whether to declare No-trump or a suit, it is generally

wise for him to select the latter.

Third Hand suit declarations should be made under either of two

conditions:--

(_a_) When the hand is so strong that there appears to be at

least a fair chance for game with the suit he names as Trump.

(_b_) When he expects a No-trump from the Fourth Hand and

wishes to indicate to his partner the lead he desires.

In the former case, it is often good policy for the Third Hand to start

with a bid of two. This serves a double purpose, as it shows the Dealer

the character of the hand and helps to shut out an adverse declaration.

If the main idea of the bid be to indicate a lead, it is advisable to

make it on the first round, when one can be called, rather than wait

until it becomes necessary to bid two, which, against a No-trump, may

prove dangerous. If the Third Hand have any such combination as King,

Queen, Knave, with one or more others of that suit, and a reentry, a

declaration at this stage is most important, as unless the partner open

that suit, it will probably never be established against a No-trump.

Even if the long suit be headed by Queen, Knave, it may be important to

show it, as the partner may hold an honor, in which case the suit may

be quickly established. When the long suit is headed by a Knave, it

should not be shown unless the hand contain more than one reentry. It

may be so necessary for the Third Hand, in the position under

consideration, to indicate a lead that no absolute strength

requirement, such as a fixed number of tricks, is essential for a bid.

It frequently keeps the adverse No-trumper from going game to have the

right suit called originally--otherwise, the Dealer has to lead his own

suit, and when the Third Hand is without strength in it, such a lead

greatly facilitates the Declarer.

WHEN THE DEALER HAS SHOWN STRENGTH AND THE SECOND HAND PASSED

One of the cardinal principles of harmonious team play is that when the

partner has made a suit declaration which is apt to result in game, it

is inadvisable to "take him out" merely with the hope of obtaining a

slightly higher score. Suppose the partner has declared a Heart and the

Third Hand holds three Hearts, headed by the Ace, four Clubs headed by

the King, no Diamonds, and five Spades with three honors. Of course,

the partner may have an honor and some other Spades, and, therefore, a

bid of Royals may produce a higher count than Hearts, but that is only

"may." The Declarer certainly has Heart strength, and the Third Hand,

valuable assistance. It takes the same number of tricks to score game

in each suit. Why, therefore, risk the game for a paltry addition to

the trick and honor score?

One of the most remarkable features of Auction is the extraordinary

desire, exhibited by a large percentage of players, to play the

combined hands. This comment is not applicable to a strong player, who,

for the good of the partnership, is anxious to get the declaration

himself, in order that during the play two or three tricks may not be

presented to the adversaries, but is intended for the general run of

cases where the partners are of equal, or nearly equal, ability.

A player, before determining to overbid his partner's call, should

remember that one of the greatest pleasures of the game is facing the

Dummy, especially when the declaration is apt to be successful, and he

should assure himself beyond peradventure that, in bidding his own suit

in preference to advancing his partner's, he is not in any way

influenced by his own selfish desires. He should be sure that, with the

positions reversed, he would thoroughly approve of just such action by

his partner; and, if his partner be the better player, he should also

convince himself that his suit is at least two tricks stronger, as his

partner's superior play probably makes a difference of at least one in

favor of his declaration.

It should be put down as axiomatic that, when a partner takes out a

Heart or Royal with a bid of another suit, he denies strength in the

suit originally declared and announces great length with probably four

honors in the suit he names; also, that when a Heart or Royal is taken

out by a No-trump declaration (except with a four-Ace holding), not

only is weakness in the declared suit announced, but also the fact that

every other suit is safely stopped.

This must not be understood as a suggestion that a partner should

seldom be overbid. Quite the reverse. The informatory school of modern

bidding, which attempts, as nearly as possible, to declare the two

hands as one, has as an essential feature the overbidding of the

partner in an infinite number of cases. It is against the foolish and

selfish instances which occur with great frequency that this protest is

directed.

WHEN "TWO SPADES" HAS BEEN DECLARED

When the Dealer bids two Spades, he gives explicit information

regarding the contents of his hand.[9] The Third Hand is, therefore,

practically in the position of having twenty-six cards spread before

him, and the question of what he should declare is not apt to be at all

confusing.

[9] See page 47.

If his hand be trickless, or practically so, he must bid one Royal, as

that reduces the commitment from two tricks to one, and increases the

possible gain per trick from 2 points to 9.

It is a noncommittal bid, as it may be made with great weakness or

moderate strength. With considerable Spade strength, however, two

Royals should be declared.

When the Third Hand has other than Spade strength, he will, of course,

bid in accordance with his holding, but it goes without saying that he

should make the best possible use of the accurate information he has

received. With four strong Spades, even with sufficient additional

strength to justify a weak No-trump, a Royal is generally preferable,

and with more than four Spades, two Royals is unquestionably the bid,

regardless of the strength of the remainder of the hand, unless, of

course, it contain the much looked for, but seldom found, four Aces.

WHEN "THREE SPADES" HAS BEEN DECLARED

When the Dealer has called three Spades, the Third Hand has quite

accurate data with which to work.[10] In this case, even if his hand be

trickless, he must bid one Royal, as his partner's three Spades might

otherwise be left in by the Fourth Hand. With some strength in other

suits, one Royal is his bid, unless his cards justify him in telling

the Dealer that, in spite of the announced long, weak Spades, the

combined hands are apt to sail more smoothly and on more peaceful seas

to the port called "Game" by the No-trump than by the suggested Royal

route.

[10] See page 49.

Should the Third Hand overbid three Spades with either Hearts,

Diamonds, or Clubs, he shows great strength in the suit named and

absolute weakness in Spades; the bid of two Royals shows assistance in

Spades, and probably other strength.

WHEN "ONE CLUB" OR "ONE DIAMOND" HAS BEEN DECLARED

When the Dealer has called one Club or one Diamond, the Third Hand (the

score being love) must realize that going game with the declaration

made is most unlikely. He should, therefore, overbid it whenever he has

sufficient strength to justify such action. With strong Hearts or

Spades, he should bid Hearts or Royals; without such Heart or Spade

strength, but with three tricks and two suits stopped, he should bid

No-trump. In the rare case in which game seems probable with the Club

or Diamond declaration, he should advance his partner's call to two or

three.

WHEN "TWO DIAMONDS" OR "TWO CLUBS" HAS BEEN DECLARED

When the Dealer has called two Clubs or two Diamonds with the score at

love, the Third Hand should allow the declaration to stand, unless his

Heart or Spade holding be such that he believes, with the assistance of

his partner's Club or Diamond suit, he may win the game; or unless able

to bid two No-trumps. With the information that his partner has an

established suit, it does not require much strength to justify the two

No-trumps call. With all the other suits stopped, no matter how weakly,

the bid is imperative. With two securely stopped, it is advisable, but

with only one stopped, it is entirely out of the question.

With a score in the trick column, the Third Hand will treat either a

one or two Club or Diamond declaration just as, with the score at love,

he treats a similar call in Hearts or Royals.

WHEN "ONE HEART" OR "ONE ROYAL" HAS BEEN DECLARED

When the Dealer bids one Heart or one Royal, the Third Hand should not

overbid unless without strength in the declaration. By this is meant

not only the absence of high cards, but also the absence of length.

With four small Hearts or Spades, and that suit bid by the Dealer, it

is almost invariably the part of wisdom to allow it to remain.

The Third Hand should bid one Royal over one Heart, or two Hearts over

one Royal with strength sufficient to justify an original call in that

suit, and distinct weakness in the partner's declaration. The theory is

that the Third Hand knows he cannot help his partner's declaration,

while it is possible his partner may help him.

When the Third Hand has such strength in Hearts or Royals that he would

advance his partner's declaration of either, in the event of an adverse

bid, it is wise for him to bid two on the first round, in order, if

possible, to shut out such adverse declaration and the information

thereby given to the leader.

The Third Hand should call two Diamonds or Clubs over one Heart or

Royal when he holds a long and practically solid suit. The original

bidder can then use his judgment whether to let this declaration stand,

continue his own, or try two No-trumps.

With a score, two Clubs or Diamonds may be bid more freely over the

partner's Heart or Royal.

The Third Hand should not bid a No-trump over the Dealer's Heart or

Royal, unless he have the three remaining suits safely stopped, or his

hand contain solid Diamonds or Clubs, and one other suit stopped.

WHEN "TWO HEARTS" OR "TWO ROYALS" HAS BEEN DECLARED

The declaration of two Hearts or two Royals is practically a command to

the partner not to alter the call. It indicates at least six sure

tricks, probably more, and a valuable honor count, in the Declarer's

hand, provided the suit named be the Trump. The Third Hand should only

change such a declaration when convinced beyond reasonable doubt that

his holding is so unusual that he is warranted in assuming the

responsibility of countermanding the order that has issued.

Weakness in the Trump and strength in some other suit is far from being

a sufficient justification, as the chances are that the Dealer is weak

in the suit of the Third Hand, and called "two" mainly for the purpose

of keeping it from being named. To overbid two Royals or Hearts with

three Diamonds or Clubs is obviously absurd, unless holding _five

honors_ and such other strength that game is assured.

To overbid two Hearts with two Royals, or two Royals with three Hearts,

is almost tantamount to saying, "Partner, I know you are trying to shut

out this declaration, but I am strong enough to insist upon it." Such

action is only justified by 64 or 72 honors, and a sure game.

To overbid two Hearts or two Royals with two No-trumps, as a rule,

means 100 Aces. High-card strength assures the game in the partner's

call with probably a big honor score; only the premium of 100 makes the

change advisable.

With strength, in the case under consideration, the Third Hand should

advance his partner's call with much greater confidence than if it were

an ordinary bid of one. He should not worry even if absolutely void of

Trumps; in that suit his partner has announced great length as well as

commanding cards; Aces and Kings of the other suits are what the

Declarer wishes to find in his hand, and with them he should bid

fearlessly.

The same line of comment applies with even greater force to the action

of the Third Hand when the Dealer has bid three Royals or three Hearts.

WHEN TO OVERBID A PARTNER'S NO-TRUMP

When the Dealer bids one No-trump and the Third Hand holds five or more

of any suit, one of the most disputed questions of Auction presents

itself.

The conservative player believes that with five Hearts or Spades,

inasmuch as but one more trick is required to secure game, it is safer

to bid two Hearts or Royals, except, of course, when the Third Hand, in

addition to a five-card suit, has the three remaining suits stopped.

The theory is that if the combined hands are very strong, the winning

of the game is absolutely assured with the suit in question the Trump,

but may possibly be lost in the No-trump by the adversaries running a

long suit. The chance of a hostile suit being established is

unquestionably worthy of the consideration of the Third Hand whenever,

with great strength in Hearts or Spades, he allows his partner's

No-trump to stand. Five adverse tricks prevent a game. In the majority

of cases, the leader opens a five-card suit. When it is not stopped,

the game is saved by the adversaries before the powerful No-trump hand

can get in; if it be stopped but once, the game is still in grave

danger unless the Declarer take nine tricks before losing the lead.

With a Heart or Royal declaration the adversaries are not apt to take

more than two tricks in their long suit, which, at No-trumps, may

produce four or five (in rare cases six), and yet the Trump bid

requires only one more trick for game.

It is unquestionably true that, with great strength, the game will be

won nine times out of ten with the No-trump declaration, but in every

such case it is absolutely "cinched" by the Heart or Royal call.

It is further argued that, when the combined hands are not quite so

strong, a game is more frequently won with the Trump declaration, as

the small Trumps are sure to take tricks, but the long suit may not be

established in the No-trumper.

The believers in taking a chance, however, view the situation from the

opposite standpoint. Their argument is that the game requires one more

trick, when a Trump is declared, but does not count as much, that the

original declarer may be weak in the suit named, yet strong in all the

others, and therefore, with a good hand, it is wiser to leave the

No-trump alone.

It is possible that the question is one rather of the temperament of

the player than of card judgment. It is susceptible of almost

mathematical deduction that five or more cards of a long suit are of

greater trick-taking value when that suit is the Trump than when

No-trump is being played, and it does not require any argument to

substantiate the proposition that the slight difference in the score,

between the total in the trick and honor columns netted from a game

made without a Trump and a game made with Royals or Hearts, is so

infinitesimal as not to be worthy of consideration. Nevertheless,

players possessed of a certain temperament will, for example, refuse to

overbid a partner's No-trump with Ace, King, Ten, and two small Spades,

King of Hearts, and Ace of Diamonds, on the ground that the hand is too

strong, although the No-trump bid may have been thoroughly justified by

such a holding as Ace, Queen, Knave, of Hearts; King, Queen, Knave, of

Diamonds; and Queen, Knave, of Spades. In that event it is practically

sure the adversaries will open the Club suit and save the game before

the Declarer has a chance to win a trick. This and similar situations

occur with sufficient frequency to make them well worthy of

consideration, and when such a hand fails to make game, it certainly

seems to be a perfect example of what might be termed "useless

sacrifice."

In spite of all this, however, probably as long as the game lasts, in

the large proportion of hands in which the taking-out does not make any

difference, the Declarer will say, "With such strength you should have

let my No-trump alone"; or the Dummy will learnedly explain, "I was too

strong to take you out."

It would be in the interest of scientific play, if, except when all

suits are stopped, the theory, "Too strong to take the partner out of

the No-trump," had never been conceived, and would never again be

advanced.

The same comment applies with equal force to the remark so often heard,

"Partner, I was too weak to take you out."

This generally emanates from a Third Hand who has a five- or six-card

suit in a trickless hand. He does not stop to realize that his hand

will not aid his partner's No-trump to the extent of a single trick,

but that in a Trump declaration, it will almost certainly take two

tricks. The Trump bid only increases the commitment by one, so it is

obviously a saving and advantageous play. Furthermore, it prevents the

adversaries from running a long suit. It, also, in Clubs and Diamonds,

is a real danger signal, and, in the probable event of a bid by the

Fourth Hand, warns the partner away from two No-trumps.

The advocates of the weakness take-out realize that in exceptional

instances the play may result most unfortunately. When the Dealer has

called a border-line No-trump, without any strength in the suit named

by the Third Hand, and one of the adversaries has great length and

strength in that suit, a heavy loss is bound to ensue, which may be

increased 100 by the advance of the bid from one to two. This case is,

indeed, rare, and when it does turn up the chances are that the

Declarer will escape a double, as the holder of the big Trumps will

fear the Dealer may be able to come to the rescue if he point out the

danger by doubling the suit call.

The fact, however, that a play at times works badly is not a sufficient

argument against its use, if in the majority of cases it prove

advantageous, and that is unquestionably true of the weakness take-out.

The strength take-out, above advocated, applies only to Spades and

Hearts. With Diamonds and Clubs, at a love score, the distance to go

for game is in most cases too great to make it advisable, but the

weakness take-out should be used equally with any one of the four

suits, as it is a defensive, not an offensive, declaration. With a

score, Clubs and Diamonds possess the same value that Hearts and Spades

have at love, and should be treated similarly.

WHEN TO OVERBID WITH STRONG CLUBS

The question of whether the Third Hand, with strong Clubs, should

overbid his partner's No-trump has aroused considerable discussion. The

argument in favor of such a declaration in Clubs, which does not apply

to any other suit, is that the difference between a strength and a

weakness overbid can be made apparent by calling three and two

respectively, and yet the show of strength will not force the Dealer

higher than two No-trumps, when his hand is such that the announcement

that the Third Hand holds strong Clubs, but nothing else, makes the

return to No-trump advisable.

On this basis of reasoning some believe in calling three Clubs whenever

an otherwise trickless Third Hand contains five or more Clubs headed by

Ace, King, Queen. This, it is conceded, only results advantageously

when the No-trump has been called with one suit unguarded, and Clubs is

one of the protected suits. When the No-trump has been declared with

such a hand as

Spades Ace, King, X

Hearts X

Diamonds Ace, King, Knave, X, X

Clubs Knave, Ten, X, X

the employment of such a system of declaration is exceptionally

advantageous; as the game is assured in Clubs, while if the No-trump be

left in, the adversaries will probably save it by making all their

Hearts before the Declarer secures the lead.

It is admitted that this case is somewhat unusual, but the advocates of

the system, conceding this, argue it is advantageous to have this bid

in the repertory, and, in the exceptional instance, to obtain the

benefit, which is bound to ensue from its use. The contention is that

it can do no harm, with such a Club holding, to force the partner to

two No-trumps, if he have all the other suits stopped, and the fact

that three Clubs is called with strength more clearly accentuates the

principle that the two Club takeout means nothing but weakness.

Admitting the force of this argument, and conceding that the system

advocated should be universally adopted were there not a wiser use for

the three Club take-out, first brings forth the question of whether the

case does not more frequently arise in which the long Club holding of

the Third Hand is headed by King and Queen, and is it not much more

probable, when the Third Hand has _long_ Clubs, that the No-trump

maker has the suit stopped with the Ace than with _four_ headed by

Knave, Ten?

It must be remembered that the three Club take-out with Ace, King,

Queen, at the head of five or more, is only advantageous when the

No-trump has been called with a hand in which only three suits are

stopped, of which the Club is one. If the Club be the suit unstopped,

the call merely forces an advance in the No-trump.

If, however, the convention be to use three Clubs to overbid the

partner's No-trump only when holding an otherwise trickless hand which

contains either at least five Clubs headed by King, Queen, Knave, or at

least six headed by King, Queen, would not the number of instances in

which the call proves of benefit appreciably increase, and would not

every reason applicable in the former case be even more forceful in the

latter?

It cannot be questioned that the partner having called No-trump, the

Third Hand is more likely to hold either five Clubs headed by King,

Queen, Knave, or six headed by King, Queen, than five or more headed by

Ace, King, Queen. The greater probability that the Dealer will have the

Ace than four headed by Knave, Ten, is just as obvious.

Take such a No-trump declaration as

Spades Ace, King, Knave

Hearts X, X

Diamonds Ace, King, Knave, X, X

Clubs Ace, X, X

and the advantage of the proposed system becomes apparent. The game,

which is almost sure to be lost by the Heart lead in No-trump, becomes

almost a certainty with Clubs Trump. When this plan is used and the

Dealer has the other suits stopped but has not the Ace of Clubs, he can

easily decide whether to go to two No-trumps, as he can estimate from

the length of his Club holding whether he can establish the long Clubs

or the adverse Ace will block the suit. When the latter is the case, he

should not bid two No-trumps unless his own hand justify it, as the

Third Hand has announced the absence of a reentry.

Take such a No-trump declaration as

Spades Ace

Hearts Ace, King, X

Diamonds Ace, King, X, X, X, X

Clubs X, X, X

and suppose the Third Hand hold one or two small Diamonds; six Clubs,

headed by King, Queen, Knave, and no other face card.

In such a case Clubs is the call most likely to produce game.

Another and possibly the wisest theory of the three Club take-out, is

that it should be reserved, not for any one particular holding which

may not occur once in a year, but for any hand in which the Declarer

wishes to say, "Partner, my cards are such that I believe we can go

game in Clubs; with this information, use your judgment as to whether

or not to return to your more valuable declaration."

A NEW PLAN FOR OVERBIDDING

In this connection, a new scheme of take-out is respectfully called to

the attention of the thoughtful and studious Auction players of the

country. It is not in general use, is not recognized as conventional,

has never been given a satisfactory trial, and is, therefore, suggested

merely as an experiment worthy of consideration.

The idea is that when a partner has called one No-trump, Second Hand

having passed, the Third Hand with five or more Spades or Hearts,

unless he have four suits stopped, should bid his long suit in the

following manner: if the hand be weak, the bid should be two; if

strong, three. This warns the Dealer, when two is called, to let the

declaration alone, as it is defensive.

On the other hand, when three is bid, the Dealer knows that his partner

is strong, and he may then use his judgment as to the advisability of

allowing the bid to stand or going back to the No-trump, which he can

do without increasing the number of tricks of the commitment.

It must be remembered that, with great strength, it is as easy to make

three No-trumps as one, three are needed for game, and, therefore,

nothing is lost by the expedient.

Playing under this system, should the Third Hand hold four or five

honors in his suit, and earnestly desire to play it for the honor

score, it would be a perfectly legitimate strategy to deceive the

partner temporarily by bidding two, instead of three.

WHEN TO OVERBID ONE NO-TRUMP WITH TWO NO-TRUMPS

When the Dealer has bid one No-trump and the Second Hand passed, the

Third Hand, much more frequently than most players imagine,

should call two No-trumps. It must be remembered that should the Third

Hand pass, the Fourth Hand can, by bidding two of a suit, indicate to

his partner the lead he desires. This places the adversaries in a much

more advantageous position than if the leader open his own suit without

information from his partner. The bid of two No-trumps by the Third

Hand generally prevents the Fourth Hand from declaring, as it

necessitates a call of three, which, sitting between two No-trump

bidders, is, in most cases, too formidable a contract to undertake.

It is, therefore, advisable for the Third Hand, on the first round, to

advance, from one to two, his partner's No-trump declaration, in every

instance in which, in the event of an adverse bid, he is strong enough

to call two No-trumps. This convention, while as yet comparatively new,

and, therefore, but little used, works most advantageously, as it

frequently shuts out the only lead which can keep the No-trump from

going game. It is important for every player to understand the scheme,

and never to overlook an opportunity to make the declaration.

WHAT THIRD HAND SHOULD BID WHEN SECOND HAND HAS DECLARED

This situation involves so many possibilities that it is hard to cover

it with fixed rules.

The Third Hand in this position should reason in very much the same

manner as the Second Hand, after the Dealer has made a declaration

showing strength.[11] There is this distinct difference, however: in the

case of the Second Hand, he only knows that the Dealer has sufficient

strength to declare, and is without any means, other than the doctrine

of chances, of estimating the strength of his partner's hand. The Third

Hand, however, in the situation under consideration, is not only

advised that one adversary has sufficient strength to declare, but also

knows whether his partner's cards justify an initial bid. When the

Dealer has shown strength, he can be counted upon for at least the

minimum that his bid has evidenced; when he has called "one Spade," it

would not be wise to expect him to win more than one trick.

[11] See page 72.

The Third Hand should consider these features of the situation, and

satisfy himself, when his partner has not shown strength, that he is

taking a wise risk in bidding over an adverse declaration. To justify a

call of No-trump over a Trump, he should either have the declared suit

stopped twice or, if it be stopped but once, he should also have solid

Clubs or Diamonds. When the Dealer has declared Hearts or Royals, and

the Second Hand made a higher suit call, it is, as a rule, wiser for

the Third Hand to advance his partner's declaration than to venture a

No-trump unless he have the adverse suit stopped twice.

When the Dealer has bid No-trump and the Second Hand two of any suit,

the Third Hand should not bid two No-trump unless he have the declared

suit stopped and at least one other trick. Without the declared suit

stopped, he should not bid two No-trump unless his hand be so strong

that he can figure with almost positive certainty that the No-trump bid

of his partner could not have been made without the adverse suit being

stopped. When in doubt, under such conditions, as to the advisability

of either bidding two No-trumps or some suit, the latter policy is

generally the safer.

When the Dealer has called No-trump and the Second Hand two of a suit,

the Third Hand must realize that his partner has already been taken

out, and therefore, under no circumstances, should he bid in this

situation, except for the purpose of showing strength; or with the

conviction that, aided by his partner's No-trump, he can fulfil the

contract he is proposing. For example, Dealer bids one No-trump; Second

Hand, two Royals; Third Hand holds six Hearts, headed by the Knave,

without another trick. Under these conditions, a Heart bid would be

most misleading, and probably most damaging. The Dealer may not be able

to help the Heart declaration, and he may very properly be encouraged

by it to believe that the Third Hand has considerable strength,

especially in Hearts, but is very weak in Spades. If, in consequence of

this supposed information, he return to his No-trump declaration, or

double an adverse three Royals, the result is apt to be extremely

disastrous.

The Third Hand must distinguish this case carefully from the situation

in which the Dealer has bid one No-trump and the Second Hand passed.

With the combination mentioned, he should then, of course, most

unhesitatingly take out his partner by bidding two Hearts; that bid,

under such circumstances, not showing strength.

Another situation that arises more frequently than would be supposed,

and the advantage of which it is most important for the Third Hand to

grasp, is when the Dealer has bid No-trump; the Second Hand, two of a

suit; and the Third Hand, without the adverse suit stopped, holds great

strength in Clubs, with such a hand that he desires his partner to go

to two No-trumps; provided he have the adversaries' suit stopped. The

bid of three Clubs does not increase the No-trump commitment which the

partner is obliged to make, and is much safer than for the Third Hand

to bid two No-trumps without the adverse suit stopped. It is a

suggestion to the partner to bid two No-trumps, provided he can take

care of the suit which the Second Hand has declared.

V

FOURTH HAND DECLARATIONS

Some of the principles that have been considered in connection with

certain Second and Third Hand bids are also applicable to similar

Fourth Hand declarations. These are easily pointed out, but the bidding

by the Fourth Hand presents other problems much more difficult.

Each player who has an opportunity to declare materially complicates

the situation, and makes it harder to accurately describe. As three

players declare or pass before the Fourth Hand has his turn, it is

almost impossible to anticipate every contingency that may arise. The

best that can be done is to subdivide Fourth Hand declarations as

follows:--

1. When the Dealer's defensive declaration has been the only bid.

2. When the only offensive declaration has been made by the Dealer.

3. When the only offensive declaration has been made by the Second

Hand.

4. When the only offensive declaration has been made by the Third Hand.

5. When the Dealer has made a defensive, and both the Second and Third

Hand, offensive declarations.

6. When the Dealer and Second Hand have made offensive declarations and

the Third Hand passed.

7. When the Dealer and Third Hand have made offensive declarations, and

the Second Hand passed.

8. When all three players have made offensive declarations.

1. WHEN THE DEALER'S DEFENSIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN THE ONLY BID

As a general rule, when this situation arises, the Fourth Hand holds a

combination of cards which makes his bid unmistakable. The other three

players having shown weakness, or, at least, the absence of offensive

strength, the Fourth Hand almost invariably has a No-trumper of such

strength that his pathway is plain. Of course, his hand may, by reason

of Spade or Heart length, call for a Royal or Heart declaration in

preference to a No-trumper, but nevertheless, under these

circumstances, it is generally easy for the Fourth Hand to declare.

When, however, the exceptional case occurs, in which the Fourth Hand

finds himself, no previous offensive declaration having been made,

without a plainly indicated bid, it is difficult to lay down a rule for

his guidance. Three players have shown weakness, and yet his cards

assure him that one or more of them is either unduly cautious, has

passed by mistake, or is trying to deceive. If the strength be with his

partner, it may be that, by passing, he will lose an opportunity to

secure the game. On the other hand, if the adversaries have the winning

cards, he may, by declaring, allow them to make a game declaration,

whereas they are now limited to an infinitesimal score.

He must also consider that, should he pass, the maximum he and his

partner can secure is 100 points in the honor column. This is a

position to which conventional rules cannot apply. The individual

characteristics of the players must be considered. The Fourth Hand must

guess which of the three players is the most apt to have been cautious,

careless, or "foxy," and he should either pass or declare, as he

decides whether it is more likely that his partner or one of the two

adversaries is responsible for his predicament.

It sometimes, although rarely, happens that the strength not in the

Fourth Hand is so evenly divided that no one of the three has been

justified in making an offensive declaration, and yet the Fourth Hand

is not very strong. When this occurs, a clever player can as a rule

readily and accurately diagnose it from the character of his hand, and

he should then pass, as he cannot hope to make game on an evenly

divided hand, while as it stands he has the adversaries limited to a

score of 2 points for each odd trick, yet booked for a loss of 50 if

they fail to make seven tricks; 100, if they do not make six. In other

words, they are betting 25 to 1 on an even proposition. Such a position

is much too advantageous to voluntarily surrender.

It is hardly conceivable that any one would advocate that a Fourth Hand

player with a sure game in his grasp, instead of scoring it, should

allow the adverse "one Spade" to stay in for the purpose of securing

the 100 bonus.

Inasmuch, however, as this proposition has been advanced by a prominent

writer, it is only fair that its soundness should be analyzed.

The argument is that the score which is accumulated in going game is

generally considerably less than 100, averaging not over 60, and that,

therefore, the bonus of 100 is more advantageous. The example is given

of a pair who adopted these tactics, and on one occasion gathered eight

successive hundreds in this manner, eventually obtaining a rubber of

approximately 1150 points instead of one of about 350.

The answer to any such proposition is so self-evident that it is

difficult to understand how it can be overlooked. It is true that a

game-going hand does not average over 60 points, which is 40 less than

100, but a game is half of a rubber. Winning a rubber is worth 250,

without considering the 250 scored by the adversaries, if they win. A

game, at its lowest valuation, is, therefore, worth 125 plus 60, or 85

more than the 100.

Examining the case cited, it will be seen that even had the pair, who

are so highly praised for their self-control in scoring eight hundred

before going game, known that for ten successive hands they would hold

all the cards, and, therefore, that they had nothing to fear from

adverse rubber scores of 250, they, nevertheless, made but poor use of

their wonderful opportunities. If, instead of accumulating that 800,

they had elected to win five rubbers, they would have tallied at the

most moderate estimate five times 350, or 1750, in place of the 1150 of

which they boast.

If, however, during that run of luck the adversaries had held two game

hands--say, the 5th and 10th, the exponents of self-control would have

made on the ten hands about 450 points, instead of approximately 1350,

which would have been secured by players who realized the value of a

game.

In the event of an even and alternate division of game hands, the

non-game winners at the end of twelve hands would have lost three

rubbers and won none, as compared with an even score had they availed

themselves of their opportunities.

It is, therefore, easily seen that the closer the investigation, the

more apparent becomes the absurdity of the doctrine that it is

advantageous to sacrifice a game for a score of 100.

2. WHEN THE ONLY OFFENSIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE DEALER

In this case the Fourth Hand, before making a declaration in any manner

doubtful, should remember that his partner has, by failing to declare,

announced that he has not sufficient strength to overbid the Dealer.

This does not, however, signify that he has a trickless hand, and the

Fourth Hand may even yet count upon him for some support. There are two

features--both of importance--one weighing in favor, the other against,

a declaration under these circumstances. One is, that the strength

being over the Fourth Hand, he is placed in the worst possible position

in the play, and there is more probability of his being doubled than

under any other conditions. If he be doubled, it is not likely that his

partner can take him out or prove of material assistance, as the double

is apt to come in the case in which the partner has passed with a

practically trickless hand.

On the other hand, the lead is with the partner, and especially when a

No-trump has been declared, it may be of great advantage to indicate

the suit which should be led. The Fourth Hand should, therefore, if

possible avoid placing a large bonus in the adversaries' column, yet he

should not hesitate to take a chance when his hand indicates that the

lead of a certain suit will be likely to save game.

In the event of a Dealer's declaration which is not apt to produce game

coming up to the Fourth Hand, he should pass, unless his holding

convince him that he will be able to go game should he declare.

3. WHEN THE ONLY OFFENSIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE SECOND HAND

In this situation the Fourth Hand is in much the same position as the

Third Hand when the Dealer has made an offensive declaration, and the

Second Hand passed.[12] The only difference is that the Fourth Hand

knows that both of the adversaries are apparently weak, whereas in the

previous case the Third Hand had that information as to only one. The

Fourth Hand can, therefore, act much more freely, and should, if in any

way possible, increase a declaration which is not apt to result in game

to one of the three game-producing bids. At a love score, a Club or

Diamond declaration should be allowed to stand in two cases only:--

(_a_) Weakness, which does not make any further declaration

reasonable.

(_b_) A combination of cards which makes it probable the Club

or Diamond call will result in game.

[12] See page 86.

When the Second Hand has declared No-trump, Royals, or Hearts, his bid

should be accorded exactly the same treatment that a similar call of

the Dealer receives from the Third Hand.[13]

[13] See page 86.

Neither a two nor three Spade declaration made by the partner should

under any circumstances, be passed. In these cases, the Fourth Hand can

have little doubt what course to pursue. His partner's hand is spread

before him almost as clearly as if exposed upon the table.[14] With

weakness, or with a moderate hand, he should bid one Royal, this being

merely a takeout, and not giving any indication of strength. In this

position he is placed in the same situation as the Third Hand when the

Dealer has made a similar declaration,[15] and these two propositions

are the only instances in the modern game of Auction where a player

without strength is required to assume the offensive. No matter how

weak the hand may be, the Fourth Hand must declare one Royal, so as to

reduce the contract, and also to increase the advantage obtained from

its fulfillment. The partner must read "one Royal" to be an indication

of weakness, or, at least, not a showing of strength.

[14] See pages 67-72 inc.

[15] See pages 88, 89, 90.

With Spade length or strength, the Fourth Hand, especially in the case

of the three Spade declaration, should bid two Royals. If he declare

anything but Royals, he says to the partner, "I realize perfectly what

you have, but my hand convinces me that the declaration I am making

will be more advantageous than the one you have suggested."

In the event of one Spade doubled coming to the Fourth Hand, he is also

accurately informed as to his partner's holding, and suggestion.[16] In

this case, it is the rare hand which does not warrant an offensive

declaration.

[16] See pages 65, 66.

It is not so great an advantage for the Fourth Hand to call two

No-trumps over one No-trump declared by the Second Hand as it is for

the Third Hand to similarly overbid the Dealer.[17] The reason for this

is, that the main purpose of this overbid by the Third Hand is to

prevent the Fourth Hand from indicating the suit he desires his partner

to lead, but the Dealer, having already declared weakness, is not so

likely to be able to make a bid which will in any way interfere with

the success of a No-trumper. It is, however, not at all impossible that

a declaration of the Dealer's long weak suit, especially when the

Second Hand has an honor or two of it, may be awkward for the No-trump

declarer, and therefore, with the holding which justifies it, the bid

of two No-trumps, under these conditions, is distinctly commendable.

[17] See pages 108, 109.

4. WHEN THE ONLY OFFENSIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE THIRD HAND

In this position the Fourth Hand is informed of his partner's weakness.

This weakness is probably quite pronounced, as the Second Hand has

passed the Dealer's defensive declaration, and although it is doubtless

reasonable for the Fourth Hand even yet to count upon his partner for

one trick, he certainly would not be justified in expecting much

greater aid. It is a place for caution; although he is in the

advantageous position of sitting over the adverse strength, he should

bid only if he see a fair chance for game, or think his hand is such

that he may safely attempt to force the adversary.

5. WHEN THE DEALER HAS MADE A DEFENSIVE, AND BOTH THE SECOND AND THIRD

HANDS OFFENSIVE, DECLARATIONS

In this situation, the Fourth Hand comes more nearly within the

category of a second round, or late bidder; that is, he is in the

position in which a player often finds himself when, after some bidding

in which he has not participated, he is in doubt whether he has

sufficient strength to advance his partner's declaration.

Under such circumstances, a player should always remember that his

partner has counted upon him for a certain percentage of high cards. If

he have not more than that percentage, it would be the part of extreme

folly for him to declare. When the partner has made a suit declaration,

and he has weakness in the suit, but some strength elsewhere, he should

be especially careful, and, before bidding, convince himself that his

side strength is more than his partner expected. Advancing a partner's

suit bid by reason of strength in other suits, while, when the strength

warrants it, unquestionably sound, is apt to deceive the partner, as

his first thought necessarily is that the bid indicates help in the

suit declared.

When the partner has declared No-trump, and the Third Hand has called

two in a suit, the Fourth Hand is in much the same position regarding

the advancement of his partner's No-trumper as the Third Hand when the

Dealer bids a No-trump, and the Second Hand, two of a suit.[18] The only

difference is that in this case there is little probability of

high-card strength being developed on the left.

[18] See page 111.

6. WHEN THE DEALER AND SECOND HAND HAVE MADE OFFENSIVE DECLARATIONS,

AND THE THIRD HAND PASSED

It is an exceptional hand which justifies taking the partner out of a

suit declaration, called over a No-trump bid by the Dealer. The partner

has the advantage of sitting over the Dealer, while the Dealer would

have this same advantage should the Fourth Hand declare some other

suit.

In this position the partner having bid two Clubs or Diamonds, the

Fourth Hand, with the other three suits stopped, is justified in

assuming that the original No-trump was made with the minimum strength,

and the chance of game, as the declaration stands, being remote, should

try a bid of two No-trumps.

When the Dealer has declared a suit, and the Second Hand, No-trump, the

Fourth Hand should overbid the Second with a suit declaration (except,

of course, in the almost inconceivable case in which the strength of

the Fourth Hand is in the suit named by the Dealer), with the same

holding that the Third Hand is justified in overbidding the Dealer's

No-trump.[19]

[19] See pages 96-108 inc.

7. WHEN THE DEALER AND THIRD HAND HAVE MADE OFFENSIVE DECLARATIONS AND

THE SECOND HAND PASSED

In this case, both adversaries having shown strength, and the partner

weakness, it is dangerous for the Fourth Hand to declare, and he should

do so only when his holding convinces him that his declaration is not

likely to be successfully doubled.

8. WHEN ALL THREE PLAYERS HAVE MADE OFFENSIVE DECLARATIONS

This case is entirely analogous to the second round or late bidding,

and is covered under the head of CONTINUATION OF THE BIDDING.

VI

CONTINUATION OF THE BIDDING

After the completion of the first round, the situation of the bidder

becomes so complex that it is most difficult to apply general rules.

Some principles, however, should be borne in mind.

Bidding one Spade, or passing, places a player with two tricks in a

position to increase his partner's call; but when a bidder has already

shown the full strength, or practically the full strength, of his hand,

he should not, under any circumstances, advance either his own or his

partner's declaration. The temptation to disregard this rule is at

times exceedingly strong. For example, the dealer declares one Heart,

holding King, Queen, at the top of five Hearts, and the Ace of Spades.

The partner calls one No-trump, and the Fourth Hand, two Royals. In

such case, the original Heart bidder frequently advances the No-trump

to two, because he has the adverse suit stopped, without considering

that his partner, in bidding one No-trump, counted upon him for either

that Ace of Spades, or the equivalent strength, and, therefore, he

should leave the question of the continuance of the No-trump to the

player who knows its exact strength.

Another example of this proposition may be worthy of consideration. The

dealer holds

Spades X, X, X

Hearts Ace, X

Diamonds King, Knave, Ten, X, X

Clubs X, X, X

He bids one Diamond; Second Hand, pass; Third Hand, one Heart; Fourth

Hand, one Royal.

In this position a thoughtless player might call two Hearts, but such a

declaration would greatly exaggerate the value of the hand. The dealer

by his first bid has announced his ability to take at least three

tricks if Diamonds be Trump, and at least two tricks if the deal be

played without a Trump. His hand justifies such a call, but that is

all; having declared his full strength, his lips must thereafter be

sealed.

His partner is already counting upon him for two high-card tricks,

which is the maximum his hand can possibly produce; should he call two

Hearts on the basis of the Ace, the original Heart bidder would expect

assistance to the extent of at least three tricks. He might receive

only one.

If, however, the dealer's hand be

Spades X

Hearts X, X, X, X

Diamonds King, Knave, Ten, X, X

Clubs Ace, X, X

a very different proposition presents itself. While this combination,

had No-trump been called, would not be stronger than the other and

should not advance the bid, with Hearts Trump it is a most valuable

assistant, and being worth at least three tricks, is fully warranted in

calling at least two Hearts.

The fact that it contains four Hearts is one material element of

strength and the singleton Spade is another, neither of which has been

announced by the original call.

One of the most difficult tasks of the bidder is to accurately estimate

the number of tricks the combined hands of his partnership can

reasonably be expected to win. It sometimes occurs, especially in what

are known as "freak" hands, that one pair can take most of the tricks

with one suit declaration, while with another, their adversaries can be

equally successful. This is most apt to happen in two-suit hands, or

when length in Trumps is coupled with a cross-ruff. In the ordinary run

of evenly divided hands, there is not such great difference in the

trick-taking ability of two declarations. The player who, except with

an extraordinary hand, commits his side to ten or eleven tricks, after

the adversaries have shown that with another declaration they do not

expect to lose more than two or three, is extremely venturesome, and

apt to prove a dangerous partner. In normal deals, a change in the

Trump suit does not produce a shift of seven or eight tricks.

WHEN TO ADVANCE THE BID

It is frequently most difficult for a bidder to determine whether he is

justified in advancing his own or his partner's declaration, and when

in doubt it is generally better to err on the side of conservatism.

The continuation of a No-trump without the adverse suit thoroughly

guarded is most dangerous, and should be risked only when the Declarer

is convinced beyond doubt that his holding justifies it, or when the

partner has shown that he can stop the threatening suit.

When the partner, either as Dealer or Second Hand, has declared one

No-trump, the bid has unquestionably been based upon the expectation of

average assistance, and unless able to furnish more, a higher call

should not be made. If, however, the partner bid twice, without aid,

two tricks unquestionably justifies assisting once.

The minimum trick-taking ability with which an original suit

declaration is made being appreciably greater than the number of tricks

contained in a border-line No-trumper, the former should be assisted

with less strength than is required to advance the latter. With two

sure tricks the partner's suit call should be helped once by a player

who has not declared, but whether a No-trump should be aided with just

two tricks and no chance of more is a question depending upon the

judgment of the bidder and upon whether one of the tricks is in the

adverse suit. With two sure high-card tricks and a five-card suit, but

without the adverse suit guarded, the five-card suit is generally the

call, especially if two in it will be sufficient. Three Clubs, however,

should not be declared without due consideration, as that declaration

is recognized as demanding two No-trumps from the partner if he have

the adverse suit stopped.

Being void or holding only a singleton of a suit, especially if it be

the suit declared by the adversary, is to be considered in reckoning

the trick-taking value of a hand which contemplates assisting a

partner's Trump declaration. For example, four small Hearts, the Ace

and three other Clubs, and five small Diamonds, when the partner has

called one Heart, are worth three or four tricks, although the hand

contains but one Ace and no face card. Holding such a combination, a

partner's bid of one Heart should be advanced at least twice.

When a declaration by the dealer is followed by two passes and an

overbid by the right-hand adversary, the dealer is frequently placed in

a doubtful position as to whether he should advance his own bid. Some

authorities contend that with less than six tricks he should wait for

his partner, and while no inflexible rule can be made to cover all such

cases, the follower of this proposition has probably adopted the safest

guide.

When the original call has been one No-trump, it is the part of wisdom

with less than six tricks, even if the adverse suit be stopped twice,

to give the partner a chance. If he can furnish more than two tricks,

he will declare, and the Dealer can then, if he so desire, continue the

No-trump, but to bid without first hearing from the partner is

obviously venturesome. If the Dealer have five tricks, that is enough

to save game, but is three tricks short of making two No-trumps.

When the Dealer has declared a strong No-trump with one unprotected

suit and his right-hand adversary calls two in that suit, it is

manifestly unwise to continue the No-trump. Holding six sure tricks in

a higher-valued suit or seven in a lower, it is probably wise to bid

two or three, as the exigencies of the case may require, in that suit.

In close cases, when advancing or declining to advance the partner's

bid, the personal equation should be a most important, if not the

deciding, factor. Some players are noted for their reckless declaring;

with such a partner the bidding must be ultra-conservative. Other

players do not regard conventional rules in their early declarations.

The bids of a partner of this kind should not be increased unless the

hand contain at least one trick more than the number that normally

would justify an advance.

When playing against a bidder who has the habit of overbidding, full

advantage should be taken of his weakness, and whenever possible he

should be forced to a high contract he may be unable to fulfil.

When a dealer who has opened with one Spade, or any other player who

has passed the first round, subsequently enters the bidding, he gives

unmistakable evidence of length but not strength. This is a secondary

declaration, and the maker plainly announces, "I will take many more

tricks with this suit Trump than any other; indeed, I may not win a

trick with any other Trump."

Overbidding a partner's secondary declaration, or counting upon it for

tricks when doubling an adversary who has overcalled it, shows

inexcusable lack of understanding of the modern system of declaring.

WHEN TO OVERBID THE PARTNER

Overbidding a partner with a declaration which he has once taken out is

only authorized by an honor count which is of material value, or a sure

game. For example, if a player declare one Royal, holding four or five

honors, and the partner overbid with a No-trump, the original declarer

should bid two Royals; but without the big honor count it is wiser to

let the No-trump stand, as the partner has announced weakness in

Spades.

The same line of reasoning should be followed when the partner has

called two of a suit over a No-trump. As a rule, under these

conditions, it is most unwise for the original No-trump declarer to bid

two No-trumps, but with four Aces, the value of the honors thoroughly

warrants such a declaration, unless the partner's call has evidently

been a "rescue."

The "rescue" or weakness take-out is a warning not to be disregarded.

Two Clubs or Diamonds over a No-trump is the most self-evident example,

and after such a call by the partner it takes a holding of eight sure

tricks to justify two No-trumps. Of course, with four Aces, seven

tricks would warrant the call, on the theory that at the worst the 100

for the Aces would set off the possible loss by the double, and more

than equal the loss if a double be not made.

FLAG-FLYING

The practice generally called "flag-flying" consists in overbidding an

adverse declaration, which will surely result in game and rubber, with

a holding which is not of sufficient strength to carry out the

contract.

While at times flag-flying is of great advantage, in inexperienced

hands it is apt to prove a dangerous expedient. The argument in its

favor is obvious. The bonus of 250 points for the rubber really makes

500 points the difference between winning and losing, and in addition

there must be computed the points and honors which would be scored by

the adversaries in the deal with which they go game, and the points and

honors which may be scored by the flag-flyers in the succeeding deal

which they hope will carry them to their goal. On this basis

flag-flyers estimate that it makes a difference of 600 points whether

their opponents go out on the current deal or the flag-flyers score

game on the next, and they claim that any loss under 600 is a gain. The

estimate is correct; the claim, ridiculous. Whenever the next deal

furnishes the player who offers the gambit sufficient strength to

capture the rubber, he gains, when his loss has been under 600, but at

best it is not more than an even chance that he will win, and when the

pendulum swings in the adverse direction, the only result of the

performance with the flag is to increase the size of the adversaries'

rubber by the amount of the sacrifice. This continued indefinitely is

bound to produce Auction bankruptcy.

The player who figures that, on the doctrine of chances, he and his

partner will hold the strong cards once in every two deals, should

remember that the fickle goddess would never have deserved nor received

her well-earned title had she been even approximately reliable.

A run of bad luck may continue for an indefinite period. It has pursued

good players not only for a day or a week, but continuously for months

and years. It does not sound warnings announcing its appearance or

disappearance. To attempt to fight it by the flag-flying process as a

rule only multiplies the loss many fold. And yet, it must not be

understood that the flag-flyer should always be shunned and condemned.

When his loss amounts to only 100 or 200, or when, not detecting his

purpose, the adversaries fail to double, and the loss is, therefore,

smaller, the odds favor his exhibition of nerve. Flag-flying, however,

is like dynamite: in the hands of a child or of one unfamiliar with its

characteristics, it is a danger, the extent of which none can foretell;

but used with skill, it becomes a tool of exceptional value.

It is only during the rubber game that even the most enthusiastic and

expert flyer of the flag should allow it to wave. With a game out, to

make the play successful Dame Fortune must bestow her favors twice in

succession. Before taking such a long chance, a player should realize

that there are future rubbers which he has an even chance of winning,

and that it is better to minimize the present loss than to allow it to

become so great that, even if good fortune follow, it will be

impossible to recoup. On the first game of the rubber, or with a game

in, and the adversaries still without a game, it is plainly too early

and the situation is not sufficiently desperate to resort to any real

flag-flying. Except when playing the rubber game, a voluntary loss of

over 100 should never be considered.

VII

DOUBLING

All doubles, except the double of one Spade by the Second Hand, which

is really an informatory bid,[20] are made for the purpose of increasing

the score of the doubler.

[20] See pages 65, 66.

The old idea of informatory doubles has been abandoned. Now when a

player doubles, he does not invite a No-trump by showing one or more

tricks in the adversary's suit, but he practically says, "Partner, I am

satisfied that we can defeat this declaration, and I desire to receive

a bonus of 100 instead of 50 for each trick that our adversaries fall

short of their contract. I do not wish you to overbid, unless your hand

be of such a peculiar character that you have reason to believe the

double will not be very profitable and feel sure that we can go game

with your declaration."

Although doubles are made under widely divergent conditions, they may

be subdivided into two classes:--

1. The double of a declaration which, if successful, will result in

game, regardless of the double, such as four Hearts, with a love score.

2. The double which, if unsuccessful, puts the Declarer out, although

if undoubled, he would not secure the game by fulfilling his contract,

such as two or three Hearts, with a love score.

In the first instance, the doubler has nothing to lose except the

difference in points which the Declarer may make as a result of the

double. When, for example, a bid of four Hearts is doubled and the

Declarer fulfils his contract, the double costs exactly 82 points. If

the Declarer fall one trick short, the double gains 50 points. When,

however, there is a redouble, the loss is increased 114 points, the

gain 100 points. The doubler is, therefore, betting the Declarer 82 to

50 that he will not make his contract, and giving the Declarer the

option of increasing the bet, so that the odds become 196 to 150. It is

evident, therefore, that even when the Declarer will go out in any

event, it is not a particularly advantageous proposition for the

doubler to give odds of 8 to 5 or 20 to 15, if the chances be even.

When the declaration is Royals or No-trumps, the odds against the

double are increased. If four No-trumps be doubled, the figures are 90

to 50 with the option given to the Declarer to increase them to 220 to

150.

The explanatory remark so often heard after an unsuccessful double, "It

could not cost anything, as they were out anyhow," is not an absolutely

accurate statement. It may be worth while to consider one ordinary

illustration of how many points may be lost by a foolish double of this

character. A bid of four Hearts is doubled and redoubled. The Declarer

takes eleven tricks, as he is able to ruff one or two high cards which

the doubler hoped would prove winners. This is an every-day case, but

the figures are rarely brought home. Without a double, the Declarer

would have scored 40 points; with the redouble, he scores 160 points

and 200 bonus, or 360, presented by an adversary, who hoped at most to

gain 50 and thought his effort "could not cost anything."

A doubtful double should not be made when the partner has another bid,

as, for example, when the adversary to the right has called four

Hearts, over three Royals declared by the partner. Under these

circumstances, the double, on the theory that the doubler expects to

secure a large bonus, may properly deter the partner from a successful

four Royals declaration. Even when the double is successful to the

extent of 100, that is not a sufficient compensation for losing the

opportunity to win the game.

The fact that a good player has declared an unusually large number of

tricks, as, for example, five Hearts, is not in itself a reason for

doubling. A player of experience, when he makes such a declaration,

fully realizes the difficulty of the undertaking. He does not take the

chance without giving it more consideration than he would a smaller

bid, and it is only fair to assume that he has a reasonable expectation

of success. Doubling, therefore, merely because the bid requires ten or

even eleven tricks, is folly, pure and simple. This comment, however,

does not apply when the bid is of the flag-flying character.[21] As to

whether or not it comes within that category the doubler will have to

determine. The Auction expert is always on the lookout for an

opportunity to gather a large bonus at the expense of a flag-flyer, and

as unduly sanguine players indulge in that practice more than others,

their declarations should be subjected to the most rigid scrutiny.

[21] See pages 139-142 inc.

The doubtful double, which, should it prove unsuccessful, will result

in the Declarer scoring a game he would not otherwise obtain, is, as a

rule, inexcusable. By this is not meant that a bid of two or three

Hearts or Royals, or of three or four Clubs or Diamonds, should never

be doubled. That would be absurd doctrine, but such a double should

never be made with the chances even, or nearly even. An experienced

bidder will not risk presenting the adversaries with the game and a

bonus unless reasonably sure of defeating the declaration.

Another absurd notion is doubling because of the partner's general

strength. The partner has an equal opportunity to double, and is much

better posted in relation to his own cards. If the strength be his, he

should decide whether or not to take the chance. When, however, one

partner has some strength in the suit the adversaries have declared,

and the other, high side cards, the double is more apt to confuse the

Declarer if made by the player without the Trump strength.

The above refers to doubtful doubles only; when the indications are

that the Declarer can be decisively defeated, the double is most

important. It is worth 100 if the Declarer go down two; 150, if he lose

three, etc. These additional points should not be allowed to escape.

Even the most venturesome doublers realize that, except in the unusual

case, it is unwise to double a bid of one, whether it be in a suit or

No-trump. Some players hesitate about doubling a bid of two, preferring

to take the chance of forcing the bidder higher. No general rule

covering the situation can be laid down, as it depends greatly upon the

character of the doubler's hand whether the adversary is apt to advance

his bid.

A double of a No-trump is much safer than of a suit declaration. The

doubler of the No-trump knows approximately what to expect from his

long suit, what suits he has stopped, and if one be unguarded, can

estimate how many tricks it may be possible for the declarer to run.

The doubler of a suit declaration cannot figure with any such accuracy.

He rarely has more than two winning Trumps, and therefore, as a rule,

must depend upon side Aces and Kings for the balance of his tricks. It

is always possible that the Declarer or his partner may be absolutely

void of the suit or suits in which the doubler expects to win his

tricks, so that sometimes a hand with which the most conservative

player would double, goes to pieces before a cross-ruff. When one hand

is evenly divided, the chances are that the others are of the same

character, but it is not a certainty that they are. When one hand has a

very long suit, and is either blank in some other suit, or has but a

singleton of it, the other hands are apt to contain very long and very

short suits. Therefore, if the doubler be without, or have but a

singleton of, a suit, he should be more conservative, in doubling a

suit declaration upon the expectation of making high side cards, than

when he has an evenly divided hand.

Probably the most advantageous situation for a double is when the

partner has declared No-trump, and the adversary to the right, two of a

suit, of which the doubler, in addition to other strength, holds four

cards, at least two of which are sure to take tricks. This comes nearer

being an informatory double than any other in vogue in the game of

to-day. The partner, however, should not take it out unless his

No-trump consist of some such holding as a solid suit and an Ace.

A hand of this character may not prove formidable against a suit

declaration, and it justifies the original Declarer, as he knows that

the adverse suit is well stopped, in bidding two No-trumps. It is one

of the few cases where it is not advisable to allow the double of a

partner to stand.

It is generally conceded that the double, although a most powerful

factor in the game, and the element which is productive of large

rubbers, is used excessively, especially by inexperienced and rash

players. If a record could be produced of all the points won and lost

by doubling, there is little doubt that the "lost" column would lead by

a ratio of at least two to one.

The double in the hands of a discreet player of sound judgment is,

indeed, a powerful weapon greatly feared by the adversaries; when used

by the unskilled, it becomes a boomerang of the most dangerous type.

A player cannot afford to have the reputation of never doubling, as

that permits his adversaries to take undue liberties in bidding, but it

is better to be ultra-conservative than a foolish doubler who

continually presents his opponents with games of enormous proportions.

A player should not double unless able to count with reasonable

exactness in his own hand and announced by his partner a sufficient

number of tricks to defeat the Declarer. It is not the place to take a

chance or to rely upon a partner, who has not shown strength, for an

average holding. It must also be remembered as an argument against a

doubtful double that the Declarer is more apt to make his declaration

when doubled, as he is then given more or less accurate information

regarding the position of the adverse strength, and can finesse

accordingly. A double frequently costs one trick--sometimes even more.

THE CHOICE BETWEEN A GAME AND A DOUBLE

A most interesting question arises when a player is placed in the

gratifying position of having the opportunity of electing whether to go

game or secure a bonus by doubling.

Which course he should take depends entirely upon the state of the

rubber, and the size of the bonus that the double will probably

produce. A game is always to be preferred to a double which is not apt

to net more than 100. When 200 is sure and a greater bonus probable,

the double should be made during either the first or second game of the

rubber. During the rubber game, however, the doubler should be more

conservative, and should "take in" his rubber unless satisfied that the

double will produce 300, with a potential possibility of more.

The reason, which may not at first be apparent, for this difference in

the situation, may be briefly explained as follows: Before a game has

been won, the securing of a large bonus in the honor column places the

fortunate doubler in a most advantageous position, as he starts the

rubber insured against loss unless he suffer a similar penalty.

When the only game finished has been won by the adversaries, a large

bonus should be preferred to game. As the adversaries already have a

game, the next hand may give them the rubber, and should it do so, its

amount will be most materially affected by the action of the player who

has the chance either to score a bonus or win a game. If the first game

be of normal size, a large bonus will nullify the result of the rubber,

but if instead a game be taken in the adversaries will score an average

rubber.

When the player considering a double has a game and the adversaries

have not, he is in a most excellent position to double with the hope of

a big winning. To secure the enlarged rubber, it is only necessary for

him to obtain one game before the adversaries get two, and as the odds

are greatly in his favor it is a chance worth taking.

When, however, each side has a game and the question is whether to

obtain a bonus or score rubber, the bonus must be large and sure to

justify giving up a rubber practically won for merely an equal chance

of capturing a larger one. It has been elsewhere stated that when a

player who has an opportunity to win a rubber fails to avail himself of

it, and on the next hand the adversaries reach the goal, the loss may

be roughly estimated at 600 points. The player who doubles during the

third game knows that the next hand may see the adversaries score the

rubber. Even if he obtain 400 points by doubling, and this happens, the

adversaries gain to the extent of approximately 200 points by his

action. On the other hand, he has an equal chance for the game, and if

he win it, he will be the gainer by the amount secured by the double.

When he has a sure 400 in sight, or even a sure 300, with a reasonable

chance of more, the odds favor the double, but it is the height of

folly to take an even chance of losing 600 unless 300 be the minimum

return.

Advice as to whether to double or go game is useful only for players

who can with accuracy estimate the trick-taking value of their hands.

To refuse a double which would net several hundred for the sake of

going game and then fall a trick short of both the game and the

declaration is most exasperating, while on the other hand to double for

a big score, instead of taking in a sure game, only to have the double

fail, is equally heart-breaking.

The player who takes either horn of this dilemma must be sure of his

ground and must figure the chances with the greatest care.

WHEN TO REDOUBLE

The question of when to redouble is so intricate that it is hard to

consider, except when the specific case arises. Some players frequently

redouble, as a kind of bluff, when convinced their declaration will

fail, the intent being to frighten either the doubler or his partner

into another declaration. Against a very timid player, this is

sometimes successful, but unless it catch its victim, it is expensive

bait.

Nine out of ten redoubles, however, are _bona fide_, and made because

the fulfilment of the contract seems assured. Even then, however, a

player should not redouble unless practically positive that neither of

his adversaries can get out of the redouble by making a higher bid.

The player who has been doubled and is sure of his contract is in a

most enviable position; game and a handsome bonus both are his, and it

would be most foolish for him to risk so much merely for the chance of

the extra score. If, however, there be no escape for the doubler, the

redouble is most valuable, and a real opportunity for it should never

be overlooked.

WHAT TO DO WHEN THE PARTNER IS DOUBLED

The player who, whenever his partner's declaration is doubled, becomes

frightened, concludes that the worst is sure to happen, and that it is

his duty to come to the rescue by jumping headlong into some other

declaration, even if it require an increased number of tricks, is a

most dangerous _vis-a-vis_. A double does not justify the assumption

that the Declarer is beaten, especially when the partner has any

unannounced help. If the partner be weak, it is folly for him to go

from bad to worse; if strong, he may enable the Declarer to make a

large score. In any event, in nine cases out of ten, "standing pat" is

his best policy.

VIII

LEADING

The selection of the correct lead in Auction is not attended with so

many difficulties as in Whist, or even in Bridge. In Whist, the

original leader is obliged to begin the play in the dark, the turn-up

constituting his entire knowledge of the strength or weakness of the

other players. In Bridge, the extent of his information is limited to

the inferences that can be drawn from the declaration and the double,

but in Auction every player has made at least one announcement which is

more or less instructive.

When there has been considerable bidding it is frequently possible to

accurately estimate the length and strength of the suit of each player

and the trick-taking value of the balance of his hand. When only one or

two declarations have been made, so much information may not be

obtainable, but even then the leader, from the failure of certain

players to bid, may be able to make deductions of considerable value.

The Auction leader, therefore, must remember the various declarations,

draw both positive and negative inferences therefrom, and whenever it

is not advisable to open his partner's suit or his own, should follow

the old principle which, since the days of Pole, has been applicable to

all games of the Whist family, and realize "'Tis seldom wrong to lead

up to the weak and through the strong."

The original opening is materially varied by the character of the final

declaration, the system of leading against a No-trump being quite

different from that employed when a suit is Trump.

HOW TO LEAD AGAINST A NO-TRUMP

When the partner has not shown strength, the leader, against a

No-trump, should open his own long suit. If he have two long suits, he

should pick the stronger except when he has declared it, and has not

received support from his partner, in which case it is generally wise

to try the other. The possible exception to the lead of a long suit

against a No-trump is when that suit has been declared, has not been

helped by the partner, and the No-trump has been subsequently bid to

the right. In this situation, with a tenace in the long suit, it is

sometimes advisable to try, by leading another suit, to get the partner

in, so that he may lead through the Declarer's strength in the suit

called by the leader. This, however, is a dangerous expedient when the

partner has not declared. Should a suit be guessed which the partner

cannot win, one of his high cards is apt to be sacrificed, and not only

nothing gained, but the advantage of the lead transferred to the

adversary. If two high cards be missing from the tenace suit, as in the

case when it is headed by Ace, Queen, Ten, or King, Knave, Ten, and the

Declarer hold the missing honors and one small card, it will take two

leads to establish the suit. It is not likely that a partner without

sufficient strength to declare will be able to get in twice, and trying

to put him in once is most apt to establish a suit for the Declarer.

Therefore, as a general proposition, unless the partner have declared,

the tenace suit should be led. When, however, the partner has shown a

suit, opening it, in preference to a tenace, is elementary and

compulsory.

When the partner has declared, the leader should open the suit named

unless satisfied that his own affords a more potent weapon for the

attack.

There are only three conditions which justify the leader in assuming

this, viz.:--

(_a_) When the leader has called his suit and his partner has

advanced the declaration.

(_b_) When the leader's suit is headed by Ace, King, Queen, or

King, Queen, Knave.

(_c_) When the leader has only a singleton of his partner's

suit and has several reentries.

Innumerable tricks, games, and rubbers have been thrown away by a

leader who, considering solely his own hand, has started with his suit

in preference to that of his partner. There is some peculiar

characteristic in the composition of many players which magnifies the

value of their own cards, so that they seem of greater importance and

more desirable to establish than their partners'. Even experienced

players have been known to commit such an Auction absurdity as opening

a suit headed by a Knave, in preference to the suit named by the

partner, which, of necessity, contains the strength requisite for a

Trump declaration.

It is fair to estimate that ten tricks are lost by denying the

partner's declaration to one that escapes the player who leads his

partner's suit in preference to his own.

When the partner has declared, his suit can be counted upon for both

length and strength, and unless it be practically solid, his hand

contains at least one reentry. The leader by his opening can attack

only one-quarter of the No-trump fortification, and it is his duty to

pick out the spot which promises to be most vulnerable. A No-trump call

is very likely to spell game unless a suit can be established against

it. In order to accomplish this it is generally necessary to start with

the first card led. Therefore, making the right original opening is

probably the only opportunity to save the game. When the leader selects

his own suit in preference to his partner's, he should be able to say,

"In spite of the strength you have declared, I am reasonably sure that

we have a better chance to establish this suit than yours."

As a rule, however, the leader does not have sufficient strength to

support such a statement, and, therefore, his lead generally says,

"Partner, I know you have considerable strength, you may have declared

expressly for the purpose of asking me to lead your suit, but I

selfishly prefer to play my own hand rather than act for the benefit of

the partnership."

It is but a puerile excuse for a leader who does not open his partner's

suit to explain that the No-trump was called by the right-hand

adversary after the partner's declaration, and that the bid, having

been made with the anticipation that the suit named would be led, he

should surprise the Declarer. It is true that the Declarer expects that

suit, but it may be the only opening he fears. It is more than possible

that the suit is stopped but once, and that leading it will save the

game, even if it do not defeat the declaration. It is certainly a very

short-sighted or unduly sanguine player who selects a suit of his own,

which has not nearly the strength of his partner's, merely on the wild

chance that his partner, rather than the No-trump bidder, has the

missing high cards.

When the partner has declared two suits and the leader has length or

strength in one of them, he should open it, but when he cannot assist

either, he should open the suit named first, as it is probably the

stronger.

As will be seen from the tables of leads against a No-trump

declaration, in some cases whether the leader has a reentry materially

affects the manner in which he should open his long suit. By a reentry

in this connection is meant either an Ace or King, unless the suit

containing the King have been bid by the adversary to the left of the

leader. In that case the King cannot be expected to win unless

accompanied by the Queen. A Queen, or even Queen, Knave, cannot be

considered a reentry, as the suit may not be led three times.

The reason for varying the lead, depending upon the presence of a

reentry, is that the sole thought of the leader against a No-trump is

to establish the suit led, and to insure so doing he opens his suit

exclusively with that end in view, regardless of whether it would

otherwise be the opening most apt to prove trick-winning. He knows that

the Declarer will, if possible, hold up a winning card until the Third

Hand is unable to return the suit. Therefore, if he be without a

reentry, he must do all in his power to force the winning card from the

adversary's hand as early in the play as possible. If he have a

reentry, he may play much more fearlessly. An example of this is a long

suit, headed by Ace, Queen, Knave. The most advantageous lead from this

combination is the Ace (as an adversary may hold an unguarded King),

and that would be the lead with a reentry; but the chances are that the

partner does not hold more than three cards of the suit, and, if it be

opened in the usual way, the King will be held up until the third

round. The leader without a reentry, therefore, is compelled to open

with the Queen, so as to establish the suit, while the partner, who

probably has a reentry, still retains a card of it.

Another important convention which applies to the opening of the

leader's suit against a No-trump declaration (but, of course, against a

No-trump declaration only) is that the original lead of an Ace calls

for the partner's highest card. An Ace, therefore, should be led from

such a combination as a suit headed by Ace, King, Knave, Ten, since the

drop of the Queen will permit the suit to be run without hesitation,

and the failure of the partner to play the Queen will permit the leader

to place its position positively, and to continue the suit or not, as

his judgment and the balance of his hand dictate. This doctrine is

extended to all cases of the original lead of an Ace against a No-trump

declaration.

The Ace should not be led unless the partner's best card, regardless of

its size, be desired, and the partner should play it unhesitatingly, be

it King, Queen, or Knave, unless the Dummy convince him that meeting

the demand of the lead will be trick-sacrificing, in which case the

leader's command should be ignored.

In leading a partner's suit, the general rule of selecting the fourth

best, when opening with a small card, is not followed. The object in

leading that suit is to strengthen the partner, and it is more

important to do that and also to tell him what is the leader's highest

card than to post him regarding exact length. Holding either two,

three, or four of a partner's suit, the top, therefore, should be led,

followed on each succeeding trick by the next in order, the lowest

being retained until the last. This is sometimes called the "down and

out." The one exception to the lead of the top of the partner's suit is

when it consists of three or more headed by Ace or King, and the

right-hand adversary has called No-trump after the suit has been

declared. In that case, it may be that the stopper which the Declarer

thinks he has in the suit can be captured, and the lead, therefore,

should be a low card.

NUMBER-SHOWING LEADS

The lead in Auction is materially simplified by the fact that

number-showing is not nearly so important as in Whist, and really only

becomes of value when opening a small card against a No-trump

declaration. In that case the lowest should always be led with four in

the suit, because the partner, having the Dummy spread before him,

being able to count his own hand, and being informed by the lead

regarding the leader's length in the suit, can generally tell the exact

number held by the Declarer, and can, therefore, accurately determine

whether it is better to continue that suit or try some other. It

happens more frequently than would be supposed that when a four-card

suit is opened with a small card, the Dummy and Third Hand have only

four cards of it between them. The Third Hand can then, if the leader

have shown exactly four, mark it as the long suit of the Declarer, and

make an advantageous shift. This is the only method of giving this

warning. If the fourth-best lead be not adopted, the suit must, in most

cases, necessarily be continued to the great benefit of the Declarer.

Number-showing by the lead of a small card (one of the rudiments of

Whist) is doubtless thoroughly understood by most Auction players; it

consists in leading the fourth best, when the suit is not of such a

character as to demand a high card or intermediate sequence opening.

This informs the partner that the leader has exactly three cards in

that suit higher than the card led, and that he may or may not have any

smaller card.

For example: the leader has Queen, 7, 6, and 4; the Dummy, a singleton

(the 3); and the Third Hand, who wins the trick with the Ace, only two

others (the 8 and 2). The Third Hand can place the Declarer with five,

as the leader, having opened his lowest, can have had only four

originally.

Number-showing leads in high cards, so advantageous in Whist, are

absolutely unimportant in Auction, and only complicate the situation.

They are not given in the table of leads appended at the end of this

chapter, nor is their use permissible, even by the Whist-player of the

old school who is thoroughly familiar with their meaning. He must

realize that Auction is not a number-showing game, and must be content

to limit his skill in that respect to the fourth best, which is

advisable when it is not higher than the 7. The limitation of the

fourth-best lead to a 7 or lower card is a useful modern innovation.

When the 8 or a higher fourth best is led against a No-trump, the

Declarer, with his twenty-six cards at his command, and with great

strength in his own hand, is apt to receive information as to the exact

high cards held by the leader which will prove of greater value to him

than to the partner. Furthermore, the lead of an 8 or 9 as a fourth

best is bound at times to conflict with the valuable lead known as the

"top of an intermediate sequence."

The holdings from which the top of an intermediate sequence should be

led are shown in the tables, and while some of the leads in such cases,

which are absolutely conventional in Auction, may shock the

Whist-player, they have, nevertheless, been found to be advisable in

the present game. Trick-winning is far more important than giving

numerical information, and the top of an intermediate sequence often

succeeds in capturing a valuable card in the Dummy, does not give too

much information to the Declarer, helps to establish the suit, and

seldom interferes with the play of the partner.

Much has been written by those who contend that the fourth-best lead

against a No-trump gives the Declarer too much information, and,

therefore, should never be employed. The writers, however, do not

consider that practically the only cases in which the lead is

objectionable for the reason cited is when it is an 8 or higher card,

while the great advantage of the lead is the warning above mentioned.

There are also instances in which the Third Hand is at some time in the

play in doubt whether to return the original lead or try his own suit.

The knowledge of whether his partner holds three or more of the suit

first led may in such case be of the greatest value.

The idea of leading the fourth best only when it is a 7 or smaller card

eliminates the objection, yet in practically every case affords the

advantage.

A player who adopts this system may at times, as, for example, with

such a holding as Ace, Queen, 10, 8, 2, be obliged to open the 8, but

inasmuch as he would lead the same card from Ace, Queen, 8, 7, 2, the

Declarer cannot bank upon the 8 of such a leader showing three higher

cards of the suit in his hand, and, therefore, no harm is done.

If the leader have any such four-card combination as Ace, or any one

face card, accompanied by 9, 8, 2, or 8, 7, 2, showing that the lead is

from four only is more important than opening the top of a two-card

intermediate sequence. When, however, the intermediate is headed by a

Knave or 10, the opening of the top of it becomes advisable regardless

of the length of the suit. Of course, the 2, in the examples just

given, is used to represent any small card, and the fourth best should

be led if it be a 3, 4, or 5.

THE LEAD AGAINST A SUIT DECLARATION

Against a suit declaration, the original lead of the longest suit is

not in the least imperative. Strength is far more important than

length. As the tables show, many high-card combinations are opened very

differently, the theory being to win with honors, not to establish

small cards. If the leader be a Whist-player, he must remember that

Auction is a very different game. The Trump has not been selected by

chance, but has been named because of his adversaries' great length and

strength. The establishment of an adverse suit against a Trump

declaration is, therefore, an almost unknown proceeding.

The object of the leader against a suit declaration is to get as many

tricks as possible, and he should utilize the two best methods for so

doing: namely, winning with his own and his partner's high cards, and

ruffing with weak Trumps.

He should avoid opening a tenace suit, regardless of its length. A

singleton, if he be short in Trumps, is probably his best lead; his

second choice should be high cards in sequence. When his hand does not

contain either of these advantageous openings, he should try his

partner's suit.

It goes without saying that if the leader have both the Ace and King of

a suit, it is always well to lead the King, not only for the purpose of

giving information and taking a practically assured trick, but also in

order to obtain a look at the Dummy, which will enable him to more

advantageously size up the entire situation.

When his partner has not shown strength, the leader need never hesitate

about starting with a strengthening card of a short suit which has not

been declared. He is also thoroughly justified, if weak in Trumps, in

asking for a force by leading the top of a two-card suit. This, while

not nearly so desirable an opening as a singleton, is better than

leading from a tenace. When the leader is long in Trumps, he should

open his own or his partner's strength.

The leader should bear in mind as a vital principal that, against a

suit declaration, a suit containing an Ace should never be opened

originally, unless the Ace (or King, if that card be also held) be led.

The leader should observe this convention, regardless of the length of

the suit. The knowledge that a leader can be relied upon not to have

the Ace unless he lead it will be of material assistance to his partner

in the play. It is sometimes very tempting to lead low with an Ace,

hoping that a King may be found in the Second Hand, and that the

partner's Queen may capture the first trick. This play will

occasionally prove successful, but in the long run, it is a

trick-loser, there being so many instances of singletons, even of

single Kings, and also of two-card suits, where, unless the Ace be led,

the Declarer will win the first trick and discard the other card.

The leader must observe the distinction between opening a long and a

short suit which has always been in force in Whist, Bridge, and

Auction--that is, when leading a suit headed by a Knave or smaller

card, if long, open from the bottom; if short, from the top. For

example, holding Knave, 9, 7, 2, the 2 should be led, but holding

Knave, 7, 2, the Knave is the card to open.

One other conventional lead should be mentioned, which, as an original

opening, is advisable against a Trump declaration only. It is the lead

of a two-card suit consisting of Ace, King. The Ace first, and then

King, signifies no more of the suit, and a desire to ruff. Of course,

by analogy, the lead of the King before the Ace shows more of the suit.

HOW TO LEAD TO A DOUBLE

The question of what lead should be made when the partner has doubled

is comparatively simple, although the answer depends materially upon

whether the double has been of a No-trump or a suit declaration. When a

No-trump has been doubled, the original lead should invariably be the

suit the doubler has declared. When the doubler has not made any

declaration, the suit the leader has called should be opened. When

neither the doubler nor the leader has declared, a case that rarely

occurs, the lead should be either the best Club or the highest card of

the leader's shortest suit, depending upon which of these two

conventions the doubler approves.

The theory of the advocates of the Club convention is that it is

important for the doubler of a No-trump to know exactly what suit will

be led, and that he is more apt to desire Clubs than any other, as the

other suits, being of greater value, are more likely to be bid. The

argument of the advocates of the high card of the short suit convention

is that it enables a double to be made with any long suit.

The Club convention is much safer, and is used by most conservative

players.

In the event of there being any doubt what the lead should be, if the

leader be fortunate enough to hold an Ace, it is good policy for him to

lead it for the purpose of taking a look. The contents of the Dummy

will probably furnish the desired information.

When a suit declaration has been doubled, a singleton is always an

advantageous opening. The lead of a high card is also advisable for the

purpose of taking a look. If the leader be without either a singleton

or high-card lead, his partner's suit is unquestionably his wisest

opening.

THE TABLES

The tables which appear at the end of this chapter should be carefully

examined by all who are not absolutely letter perfect in the

conventional leads. The present tendency of players taking up Auction

is to regard the leads as unimportant, and this often results

disastrously. The quondam Whist-player realizes the necessity of having

every lead at his fingers' ends, but for the benefit of those who have

never participated in the older game, it may be said that the

conventional leads have been determined upon only after years of

experimentation; as a consequence of which it is known just which card,

in the long run, will win the most tricks.

A leader who, on the spur of the moment, during the play, tries

something else, is taking a course sure to deceive an intelligent

partner, and one which will probably reduce the number of his tricks.

The one combination that seems to tempt some players to disregard the

conventional, is the King, Queen, Ten, against a No-trump. With this

holding the King is manifestly most advantageous, as if the Declarer

hold Ace, Knave, it will either force the Ace and hold the tenace over

the Knave or win the trick. Without the Ten, a small card should be

led, but many players fail to recognize the important distinction.

Every one attempting to play the game should learn the conventional

leads, and having once mastered this comparatively easy lesson, should

never allow a childish impulse, such as "having a hunch," to induce an

experiment with a lead not recognized as sound.

The various tables follow.

OPENING LEADS AGAINST A NO-TRUMP DECLARATION

With a Without a

Holding Reentry Reentry

Ace, King, Queen, Knave, with or without others Ace Ace

Ace, King, Queen, Ten, with one or more others Ace Ace

Ace, King, Queen, Ten King King

Ace, King, Queen, with three or more others Ace Ace

Ace, King, Queen, with one or two others King King

Ace, King, Knave, Ten, with two or more others Ace Ace

Ace, King, Knave, Ten, with one other Ace Knave

Ace, King, Knave, Ten King Knave

Ace, King, Knave, with three or more others Ace Ace

Ace, King, Knave, with two others Ace 4th best

Ace, King, Knave, with one other King King

Ace, King, and five others Ace Ace

Ace, King, and four others King 4th best

Ace, King, and two or three others 4th best 4th best

Ace, Queen, Knave, Ten, with or without others Ace Queen

Ace, Queen, Knave, with one or more others Ace Queen

Ace, Queen, Ten, Nine, and three others Ace Ten

Ace, Queen, Ten, Nine, with less than seven Ten Ten

Ace, Queen, and five others Ace 4th best

Ace, Queen, and two, three, or four others 4th best 4th best

Ace, Knave, Ten, with one or more others Knave Knave

Ace, Knave, with two or more others 4th best 4th best

Ace, Ten, Nine, with one or more others Ten Ten

Ace, Ten, Eight, with one or more others 4th best 4th best

King, Queen, Knave, Ten, with or without others King King

King, Queen, Knave, with one or more others King King

King, Queen, Ten, with one or more others King King

King, Queen, with five or more others King King

King, Queen, with four or more others King 4th best

King, Queen, with two or three others 4th best 4th best

King, Knave, Ten, with one or more others Knave Knave

King, Knave, with two or more others 4th best 4th best

King, Ten, Nine, with one or more others Ten Ten

King, Ten, with two or more others 4th best 4th best

Queen, Knave, Ten, with one or more others Queen Queen

Queen, Knave, Nine, with one or more others Queen Queen

Queen, Knave, with two or more others 4th best 4th best

Queen, Ten, Nine, with one or more others Ten Ten

Knave, Ten, Nine, with one or more others Knave Knave

Knave, Ten, Eight, with one or more others Knave Knave

Knave, Ten, with two or more others 4th best 4th best

Ten, Nine, Eight, with one or more others Ten Ten

Ten, Nine, Seven, with one or more others Ten Ten

In all the above cases in which the fourth best is given as the lead,

should the hand contain an intermediate sequence, headed by an 8, or

higher card, the top of such sequence should be led instead of the

fourth best. For example, King, Knave, 9, 8, 2, lead the 9; King,

Knave, 9, 7, 2, lead the 7.

In any case not mentioned, in which there is not an intermediate

sequence, headed by an 8 or higher card, the fourth best should be

opened.

The lead of the fourth best, when it is an 8 or higher card, should be

avoided whenever possible. For example, Ace, Queen, 10, 8, 6, 2, lead

the 6; but never lead the lowest when holding more than four, so from

Ace, Queen, 10, 8, 2, lead the 8.

In all the Ace-King combinations in the above table, in which the Ace

is the conventional lead, it is selected in preference to the King,

because the highest card of the partner is desired; when the King is

the lead, the suit is not of sufficient strength to make that play

advisable.

OPENING LEADS AGAINST A TRUMP DECLARATION

Holding Lead

Ace, King, Queen, Knave King, then Knave

Ace, King, Queen King, then Queen

Ace, King, Knave King

Ace, King, and one or more others King

Ace, King, without any others Ace, then King

Ace, Queen, Knave[22] Ace, then Queen

Ace, Queen, and one or more others[22] Ace, then lowest

Ace, Knave, Ten[22] Ace

Ace, and one or more small Ace

King, Queen, Knave, with or without others King

King, Queen, Ten, with or without others King

King, Queen, with or without others King

King, Knave, Ten, with or without others[22] Knave

King, Knave, and one or more others[22] Lowest or 4th best

King, Ten, Nine, and one or more others[22] Ten

King, and two or more others[22] Lowest or 4th best

Queen, Knave, Ten, with or without others Queen

Queen, Knave, Nine, with or without others Queen

Queen, Knave, and two or more others 4th best[23]

Queen, Knave, and one or no others Queen

Queen, Ten, Nine, with or without others Ten

Knave, Ten, with or without others Knave

Ten, Nine, with or without others Ten

[22] These suits unless declared by partner should not be

opened, as they are disadvantageous leads against a Trump

declaration.

[23] This is the conventional lead from this combination, but

many good players prefer the Queen, especially when the

indications are that the hand is not evenly divided. When long

suits have been announced, the chances are that the suit led will

be ruffed on the third round, if not earlier. If the King be in

the Second Hand and the Ace in the Third, a trick can be gained

by leading the Queen whenever the suit does not last for three

rounds. Therefore, unless the hand indicate that the suits are

evenly divided, the Queen seems to be the better lead.

IX

THE PLAY

It has been stated elsewhere that it is easier to advise an Auction

player how to declare than how to play. This is unquestionably true,

and as a rule instruction in print relating to intricate situations in

the play is of little benefit to the reader.

End situations, and even those which arise earlier in the hand,

seldom exactly repeat themselves. Pages may be filled with the

description of brilliant plays by the Declarer and his opponents.

The reader may study such examples until he becomes thoroughly

familiar with every detail, and yet, so great and infinite is the

variety of Auction hands, may play for years without ever having one

of them arise. Mathematicians state that the 52 cards may be

distributed in 53,644,737,765,839,237,440,000 different ways, and

that a player may receive 635,013,559,600 different hands. There is

no reason to question the accuracy of these figures, but even if

they be grossly excessive, it is still self-evident that each deal

is apt to produce some totally new situation.

All that will be attempted, therefore, in considering the play, is to

offer a few general suggestions that it is believed will be found

applicable to a considerable percentage of hands, and that it is hoped

will prove useful.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PLAY IN AUCTION AND BRIDGE

There is little difference between the play in Auction and Bridge,

although in Auction, due to the bidding, all the players have much

greater information regarding the strength and weakness of the various

hands.

There is one point of variance, however, worthy of consideration:--

In Bridge, the player of the open hand is generally striving for the

game as his only object. In Auction, the Declarer has two purposes in

view; first, to fulfil his declaration; and second, when the making of

the declaration does not in itself secure game, to obtain that also.

Naturally, the opponents of the Declarer play with exactly the opposite

idea, their first object being to prevent him from going game, and

their second, to keep him from fulfilling his contract.

PLAYING FOR GAME

The Declarer should never take a finesse or make any other play which,

if it succeed, gains one or more tricks, but which, if it fail, risks

the fulfilment of an otherwise assured contract. Having once made sure

of his bid, he should apply a similar rule to the winning of the game.

An extra trick counts comparatively little, but the failure to carry

out a contract or to capture a game may alter the result of the rubber.

The game is, of course, far more important than the contract, and the

Declarer, when he has a reasonable chance of obtaining it, should, if

necessary, risk his declaration. On the other hand, his opponents

should save the game beyond peradventure, even if by so doing they lose

an opportunity to defeat the Declarer.

A couple of examples will show this more clearly than pages of

explanation.

Suppose, the score being love, the Declarer, who has bid three Royals,

has about exhausted the possibilities of his cards. He has won eight

tricks and has the lead in his own hand, with an Ace and Queen of the

same suit in the Dummy. One more trick will fulfil his contract, two

will give him game. The development of the play has shown that the

adversaries will make the rest of the tricks whenever they obtain the

lead, and consequently, if he finesse and lose, the eight tricks

already taken will be all he will secure, his Ace will "die," and he

will be "one down."

He is without information as to the location of the King; neither

adversary has declared, and neither has by discard or otherwise in the

play given a reliable hint as to the absence or presence of the

all-important card.

His duty is plain. By finessing he may lose 27 points and a penalty of

50, 77 in all, but the finesse gives him an even chance to win the

game; and whether it be the rubber, with its premium of 250, or merely

the first game, but still a most important advance toward the goal, he

should take his chance, realizing that the value of the object for

which he is striving is far greater than the 77 he may lose.

Under similar conditions, however, if the Trump be Diamonds, the

finesse should be refused. It would then take three more tricks to make

game, and but two are possible. One completes the contract, and winning

the finesse adds only 7 points, less than one-tenth of the 71 placed in

jeopardy.

The 21 points in the trick column assured by refusing the finesse are,

viewed from a practical standpoint, just as near a game as 28 would be,

but 21 makes the bidding for game on the next deal much easier than if

the effort to win the extra 7 had resulted in the score remaining at

love. In this case, therefore, not only when the chances are equal, but

even when unmistakable inferences of declaration and play indicate that

the success of the finesse is almost assured, the opportunity should be

refused.

"Penny-wise and pound-foolish" aptly characterizes a player who would

risk advantage of position and 71 points for the chance of gaining a

paltry 7.

PLAY FOR AN EVEN BREAK

The Declarer, in the absence of any positive indication to the

contrary, should base his play upon the probability of an even division

of the cards. That is, with seven of a suit in his own hand and Dummy,

he should play for each of the adversaries to have three; with nine, he

should play on the basis that the four missing cards are equally

divided. In the long run, playing for the even break will net many

tricks, but in a small percentage of instances it will result

unfortunately. The case in which the question most frequently arises is

when either in Trumps or in the Declarer's strong suit in a No-trump,

the two hands hold nine cards headed by Ace, King, Knave. The division

between the two hands may be

Ace, King, Knave, X, X and X, X, X, X

Ace, King, X, X, X and Knave, Ten, X, X

Ace, Knave, X, X, X and King, X, X, X

King, Knave, X, X, X and Ace, X, X, X

or any other.

In all these cases the Knave finesse is tempting, but it should be

refused, and the Ace and King played with the expectation of an even

break which will drop the Queen on the second round. The exceptions to

this general rule occur when

(_a_) The presence of the Queen in either adverse hand has

been indicated by some declaration or double.

(_b_) When one adversary has shown unusual length in some

other suit.

In the latter case, it is sometimes wise to play on the assumption that

the adversary, very long in another suit, has but one of the suit in

question, and consequently to finesse the _second round_ on that

basis.

GENERAL PLAY OF THE DECLARER

The Declarer, as soon as the Dummy's cards are spread, should size up

the situation, see how many tricks are in sight, what suit or suits it

is necessary for him to establish, and what, if any, finesse or

finesses he will have to make in order to secure his declaration and

his game.

In determining which way to finesse, he should be materially assisted

by the bids of his adversaries, and during the play, as situations

develop either in his favor or against him, he should be continually

figuring on the best method to make his declaration. He should remember

that failure to fulfil his contract will not only result in a material

loss on the score, but, in the end, may cost the rubber. When the

scheme of play he has planned at the start shows signs of becoming

unsuccessful, he should, if possible, change it for one more promising.

The Declarer, especially if brought up in the Whist school, should bear

in mind that he now has no partner anxiously seeking information

regarding the contents of his hand, but that he has two adversaries

from whom he should withhold, as long as possible, knowledge of his

strength, weakness, aims, and schemes. When any method of play suggests

itself which seems more deceptive than another, and yet produces the

same result, it should be adopted. False cards should be used whenever

possible, as they are less informatory than the conventional lowest of

a sequence. The Declarer should worry his opponents in this way

whenever the opportunity offers. In playing small cards, the higher

should frequently precede the lower, and every means should be used to

make it as difficult as possible for the adversaries to place the

cards.

DECLARER'S PLAY OF NO-TRUMP

The Declarer will find that he is obliged to use different tactics when

playing a No-trump from those he employs when a Trump has been named.

In the former case, his main object should be to establish his long

suit or suits, and to shut out those of the adversary. When he has the

Ace (without any other stopper) of an adverse suit, unless there be

some other he fears more, he should refrain from playing the Ace until

the third round, or until sure that the partner of the long hand has

exhausted his holding of that suit. The reason for this is obvious. If

the holder of the long suit can be kept from the lead, the suit will

not be made. He may be without a reentry, so it is important that his

partner be unable to put him in by leading that suit. In this case, the

Declarer should take any doubtful finesse, which he has the opportunity

of taking either way, so that, if it lose, the holder of the long suit

will not be in the lead.

The Declarer should postpone as long as possible leading a suit of four

cards in one hand and three in the other, headed by Ace, King, and

Queen, but not the Knave, unless he be afraid of a long, adverse run

which will force him to awkward discards. The reason is that, should

either of the adversaries be long in that suit, three rounds will

establish for him one or more cards which otherwise would not be made

good. Leading even two rounds will be a warning not to discard from

that suit. It should, therefore, be avoided, except for the purpose of

placing a lead, until the other strength of the Declarer is exhausted,

or until it becomes evident that, when next he loses the lead, the

adversaries will control the situation. Then, and not until then,

should he lead such a suit with the realization that, having postponed

its establishment as long as possible, he has adopted the most probable

method not only of shutting out adverse long cards, but also of making

an extra trick for himself.

While the probability of establishing an adverse trick is not nearly so

great when the Declarer has four cards of such a suit in each hand, it

is still possible, and the method of handling it above advised, when

the total holding is seven, should be followed even with eight. A

thoughtless Declarer who has nothing to fear from an adverse run will

often as soon as he gets in (and before he establishes some suit that

demands attention) start with a suit of this character. Such tactics

sometimes cost a declaration--sometimes a game; yet the thoughtless one

rarely appreciates his folly.

An example may make this more evident:--

DUMMY DECLARER

Spades X, X Ace, Queen, X

Hearts Ace, X, X, X King, Queen, X

Diamonds X, X Ace, Queen, X

Clubs Knave, 9, X, X, X Queen, 10, X, X

The 2 of Spades is opened, and the Declarer wins the first trick with

the Queen. He now has assured two Spade, three Heart, and one Diamond

tricks, with a chance of one more in both Hearts and Diamonds; six sure

and eight possible, without the Clubs. If he establish his Clubs, he

can make 3 tricks in that suit, which will insure game.

If he open his Hearts, he may establish one or more for the adversaries

and thus give up all chance of the game, as he is at best practically

sure to lose two Spades and two Clubs.

It is impossible to gain any advantage by running the four Hearts

before the Clubs, even if they all be good; in other words, it is a

play which may cost the game and cannot by any possibility gain

anything whatever.

When the Declarer holds a suit long in both hands, headed by the three

top honors, two in one hand and one in the other, it is wise to win the

first trick with one of the honors of the hand which holds two; this is

apt to be beneficial in the event of an adversary refusing or having a

singleton.

The Declarer, even when he has bid a light No-trump and received little

assistance, should play with confidence. His adversaries do not know

the flimsy character of his declaration, and will credit him with more

powerful cards than he really holds. Even experienced players seem to

feel that a No-trump declaration is entitled to greater respect than it

deserves when made with the minimum strength which conventionally

authorizes it. A clever player will frequently capture the odd with

such a declaration, merely because the adversaries do not realize his

weakness.

DECLARER'S PLAY OF A SUIT DECLARATION

The Declarer generally has a greater opportunity to display skill in

the play of a suit declaration than of a No-trumper. With a suit

declared, as soon as the Dummy is placed before him, he must determine

which of two plans of campaign it is advisable for him to adopt: that

is, he must either lead Trumps until the adversaries have no more, or

he must play the ruffing game and make his Trumps separately. The

latter is especially advantageous if, with his weaker Trump hand, he

can take a trick or tricks that would, of necessity, be lost if he

immediately exhausted all the Trumps.

The Declarer, therefore, should first look for a chance to ruff losing

cards with his weak hand; when he does not find that opportunity, he

should realize that the adversaries will attempt to do some ruffing

themselves, and in nine cases out of ten, should exhaust the Trumps.

When the Declarer has a holding which makes him anxious that the Trump

lead should come from the other side, and the Dummy contains short

Trumps and a short suit (which short suit the Declarer cannot arrange

for the Dummy to ruff, either because he has the same number as the

Dummy, or because he has winning cards), he can sometimes induce an

adverse Trump lead by opening the short suit, thus conveying to his

adversaries the impression that he desires to ruff with the short

Trumps.

If the Declarer have sufficient Trump length in his weak Trump hand to

exhaust the adverse Trump holding, and still remain with sufficient

Trumps for all possible ruffs, he should lead Trumps before taking the

ruff, so as to avoid any chance of an over-ruff. An obvious case will

exemplify this principle:--

The Declarer holds Ace, King, Queen, and one small Trump; the Dummy,

four small; the Declarer, King, Queen, and two small Clubs, in which

suit the Dummy has Ace and one small. Part of the Declarer's original

scheme of play is to have the Dummy ruff his losing Club, yet to lead

that suit before three rounds of Trumps would be the height of folly,

as a winning card might be ruffed by an adversary or the Dummy

over-ruffed.

Managing the Dummy so as to utilize all his small Trumps to the

greatest advantage is one of the tests of the skill of the player of

the combined hands. A simple example follows: With Hearts Trump, the

Dummy puts down one small Club, and three worthless Trumps. The

Declarer wins the first trick, has Ace at the head of his long Trumps;

also, Ace, King, and two losing Clubs. His play is plain. He should

lead his Ace and then a small Club; ruff the latter, lead a Trump from

Dummy, and then the remaining losing Club, for Dummy to ruff with his

last Trump.

PLAY BY DECLARER'S ADVERSARIES

The adversaries of the Declarer must realize that they are at some

disadvantage in the play. The Declarer knows every card in the Dummy,

but each of his opponents can at best only guess the holding of his

partner. They should, therefore, strive by every means in their power

to give each other all possible information.

They should always play the lowest, and (except with Ace, King, and one

or more others) lead the highest of a sequence. The only case in which

they should withhold information or play a false card is when such

action may upset the calculations of the Declarer, and either cannot

mislead the partner, or, if it do, will not affect his play. For

example, with King, Queen, over an adverse Ace, Knave, 10, a false card

is more than justified, as it tempts the Declarer to mould his play for

another finesse; so also, in other cases in which the partner is

without strength in the suit and his play is, therefore, unimportant,

he may be treated as if he were a Dummy.

The advantage of forcing the strong hand is just as great in Auction as

in Whist or Bridge, and as a rule it is the best play possible for the

adversaries of the Declarer. The only exception is when the Dummy has

an established suit and a reentry.

Suppose, for example, with four tricks to play, the Declarer has the

last Trump (Hearts), one Club, and two Diamonds. The Dummy has three

winning Clubs, and the leader a Diamond and winning Spades. He knows he

can force the Declarer's last Trump with a Spade, and generally this

would be his wisest play; but the long Clubs in the Dummy show that the

usual tactics cannot now be employed, and his only chance is to lead a

Diamond hoping that his partner has one or two winners.

It goes without saying that leading a suit the weak adverse hand can

trump, and upon which the strong hand can discard, is carrying out a

custom most commendable at Christmas, but which at the card-table does

not arouse the enthusiasm of the partner.

A player should be most careful not to indicate by some mannerism that

his hand is trickless. By pulling a card before it is his turn to play,

by apparent lack of interest, or by allowing himself to be wrapped in

gloom, he may give the Declarer as much information as if he spread his

hand on the table.

THE SIGNAL

One of the best and most serviceable methods of giving information is

by using "the signal," which is made by the play of an unnecessarily

high card. For example, the Ace and King of a suit are led. The play of

the 6 before the 5 constitutes a signal, as the 6 is an unnecessarily

high card.

The meaning of this signal is that the maker desires the suit, in which

it is made, continued. Playing in ordinary order, lower before higher,

shows that the continuation of that suit is not requested. It is the

old Trump signal of the game of Whist, which, inasmuch as a demand for

a Trump lead is not needed in Auction, has been borrowed and

transformed into a request to continue the suit. This signal was first

used to mean, "I can ruff the third round," but the absurdity of

limiting it to any such meaning soon became apparent, and, as it is now

played, it means, "Partner, continue this suit. I have some reason for

asking you so to do." The failure to give this signal may mean, "Shift

the suit," but does not of necessity do so. It merely says, "Partner, I

have no reason for asking you to lead this suit a third time."

This signal is a most important part of Auction tactics. It can be

given on either the partner's or the Declarer's lead, should always be

used when a continuation of the suit is desired, and should be watched

for by the partner with the most painstaking care. The first trick

sometimes furnishes this information. For example, the play of the

deuce, or of any card which the partner can read as being of necessity

the lowest, tells him that either the card is a singleton or that the

player is not beginning a signal.

When a player is anxious to place his partner in the lead, the signal

may be of the greatest possible value. Suppose, for example, he has two

suits from which to choose. In one of these suits he is without

strength, but his partner may have the Ace. In the other, he has the

Ace himself, and his partner may have the King. If he guess the wrong

suit, the Declarer will get in and take the rest of the tricks. By

leading his Ace and watching the size of the card his partner plays, he

can generally tell what to do. If the lowest card be played, he should

shift the suit. In such a situation, if the partner wish the suit

continued, and has more than two small cards, he should play the

highest so as to emphasize the signal.

THE DISCARD

The discard which in Whist has been the subject of so many

controversies, and which, even in Bridge, has created some discussion,

does not assume nearly so great importance in Auction. The strength of

the various suits having been clearly indicated by the bid, there is

not as great opportunity to furnish new information by the discard.

It must not, however, be assumed, merely because the Auction discard is

comparatively unimportant, that it is not worthy of consideration. True

it is that there is no need to worry over any such complicated systems

as strength or rotary discards. They are apt to confuse and produce

misunderstandings far more damaging than any possible benefit which

results when they work perfectly. The strength discard may compel the

playing of a card which, if its suit be established, will win a trick,

and the rotary is not always reliable, as the discarder may be void of

the "next suit," or unable to discard from it because it is composed of

high cards only or of necessary guards for single honors. The

"odd-and-even" discard, that is, 3, 5, 7, 9, showing strength, 2, 4, 6,

8, weakness, is very satisfactory when the hands are made to order, but

a certain proportion of hands fail to contain an odd card when the

discarder desires to announce strength, or an even one when he has

extreme weakness. The awkwardness, when using this system, of such a

holding as 3, 5, 7, is self-apparent.

All these plans or fads had their innings in Whist, where important

information had to be conveyed by the discard, but in Auction, they are

about as necessary as pitching a curve to a blind batsman.

The plain, simple, old-fashioned discard from weakness is all that is

used or required, provided it be understood that a signal in the

discard means a reversal of its ordinary inference. A signal by discard

(that is, for example, discarding first a 5, followed by a 2) is

generally a showing of strength in that suit, and a most pronounced

suggestion, if not an imperative command, that it be led at the first

opportunity. The only case in which it is not an evidence of strength

is when it shows a desire to ruff. The signal in the discard is most

serviceable when the Declarer is playing a long suit, and the partner

is in doubt which of the two remaining suits to keep guarded. In this

case it may not be a command to lead, but merely a wireless message

saying, "I have this suit stopped; you take care of the other."

A signal in a discard to show strength is only necessary when it is not

advisable to discard once from each of the other suits, which by

inference gives the same information, yet does not shorten the strong

suit.

Strength information can often be transmitted by the weakness discard,

just as quickly and more simply than by the now generally abandoned

strength discard. For example, the discard of the lowest card shows

weakness and negatives all possibility of a strength signal, but if the

first discard be as high as a 7 or 8, and the partner can read, from

the general composition of his hand and the Dummy, that the discarder

must hold a lower card in that suit, he gets the information at once.

Regardless of showing his partner strength or weakness, the player has

ample opportunity to give evidence of skill in discarding. Too much

information should never be given to the Declarer when he is in the

lead and controls the situation. There are many hands in which it

becomes obvious that all the adversaries of the Declarer can hope to

accomplish is the saving of a slam, or the taking of one more trick.

The question is not what to tell the partner to lead when he gets in,

but how to win a single trick. In such a case, a bluff discard, _i.e._,

showing strength where it does not exist, is sometimes effective,

although a keen Declarer is not apt to be easily deceived by any ruse

so transparent. One thing to remember under such circumstances,

however, is not to help the Declarer by showing weakness, so that he

will know which way to finesse. In No-trumps or with the Trumps

exhausted, never discard a singleton, or too many cards of a weak suit.

When a suit has been declared, it is unnecessary, by informatory

discarding, to repeat the announcement of strength. This principle,

just as is the case with other systems of play, is predicated upon the

ability of the partner to remember the bids. If, however, he be unable

to do so, information by discard will obviously be sowing seed on

barren ground, and should be withheld, as the Declarer is the only one

who will reap any benefit.

BLOCKING THE DUMMY

When the Declarer is playing a No-trump and the Dummy holds a long suit

without reentry, an adversary of the Declarer may have the opportunity,

when he has a card stopping that suit, of blocking it and preventing

the long cards from making, by holding the winning card until the

Declarer has played what is necessarily his last card of the suit.

AVOID OPENING NEW SUITS

The adversaries of the Declarer should avoid opening new suits unless

the situation shows it to be necessary. They should remember that when

the honors of a suit are evenly divided, opening it is practically sure

to cost a trick, and that the starting of any suit, which is not headed

by Ace and King, or a three-card sequence, is almost invariably

disadvantageous. The lead by the partner has been made with some

object, and should, therefore, be returned, except when the holding of

the Dummy or some other development renders such action plainly

inadvisable.

Shifting suits is about as advantageous as swapping horses while

crossing a stream, and the advice to return the partner's suit rather

than risk a new one applies with equal force whether a No-trump or suit

declaration is being played, but does not refer to the situation in

which the partner evidently desires that the suit he has declared be

led through strength up to him.

HOW TO RETURN PARTNER'S LEAD

When the original Third Hand returns a suit opened by his partner, he

should lead the winning card, if he hold it. If without the best card,

when the lead is against a No-trump declaration, it is far more

important that a high card should be led through strength, and also

that the holder of the length should be accurately advised as to his

partner's high cards, than that he should be told the exact number of

small ones. Therefore, when playing a No-trumper, the highest card

should be returned from either three or two remaining. With four

remaining (five originally), the holding may be longer than that of the

original leader, and, therefore, the lowest should be led. If the

partner be a keen counter of small cards, the next to the lowest is

doubtless more informatory and just as advantageous as the lowest. When

the original Third Hand returns a suit opened by his partner against a

suit declaration, there is some difference of opinion among good

players as to whether he should follow the Whist rule, which is the

most informatory as to number, and lead the lowest of three remaining,

the higher of two; or whether it is unwise to complicate matters by

distinguishing between this case and the return when a No-trump is

being played. The question is not very important as long as partners

understand which convention is being used.

None of these rules applies in the case, readily distinguishable, in

which the adverse strength in the suit is in the Dummy, and it is

necessary to hold a high card over that hand; the play must then be

made to fit the situation, and not according to any hard-and-fast

principle.

THE FINESSE

The cards of the Dummy being exposed make it easy for the player

sitting back of him to determine when to finesse. As the object of a

finesse is to catch a high card on the right, it is folly to finesse

against nothing--for example, the leader opens with Knave against a

No-trump; the Third Hand has King and others; when the Dummy has the

Queen, it is obvious the King should not be played unless the Queen

cover the Knave, but when the Dummy holds only worthless cards, the

Third Hand should play the King, as, should he finesse against nothing,

he would allow the Queen to win. The leader has opened either from Ace,

Knave, Ten, or a suit headed by a Knave-Ten combination. In the former

case the play of the King insures every trick; in the latter, it helps

clear the suit. It, therefore, is an example of the rule not to finesse

when the Dummy has nothing.

An apparent exception to this rule occurs when the lead is made in

answer to a declaration, or as an evident effort to find the partner's

strength. For example, the original Third Hand, with six Hearts headed

by King, Ten, and two reentries, has called Hearts. The Declarer is

playing a No-trumper, and the opening is the Knave of Hearts. The Dummy

is without strength. In that case, the Declarer is marked with both the

Ace and Queen of Hearts. The Third Hand should, therefore, play small.

The play of the King cannot be of any benefit, and should the Declarer

have the Nine, will be most expensive. This really is not a finesse

against nothing, but, the position of the winning cards being marked,

is merely a conservation of strength.

The same general principle applies in many similar cases; when,

however, a small card is led, the Third Hand should not finesse, unless

the Dummy contain some high card.

Playing No-trump, the following finesses are advisable over the Dummy:--

WHEN DUMMY HAS FINESSE

King Ace, Queen

Ace, Knave

Ace, Ten

King, Knave Ace, Ten

Ace, Nine

King, Ten Ace, Nine

Queen Ace, Knave

Ace, Ten

King, Knave

King, Ten

Knave Ace, Ten

King, Ten

Queen, Ten

Do not, however, except with a fourchette, finesse against Queen or

Knave singly guarded, when it is evident that the Declarer and Dummy

hold only four cards of the suit, and the Ace or King is marked with

the leader.

When playing No-trump, as a rule do not finesse if so doing will block

the partner's suit.

X

SCORING AND SCORE-SHEETS

The score is a very important incident of the game of Auction, and to

keep it properly requires considerable care and skill.

The figures frequently run into high numbers on both sides, and when

the rubber continues during three hotly contested games, they become

quite voluminous.

The score-sheet should be left on the table, and the writing on it

should be of such size that it can be seen at a glance. This saves time

and trouble, as it relieves the players from the necessity of asking

the state of the score.

In some clubs two scores are kept, so that, in the only too probable

contingency of a mistake being made, it may invariably be detected.

This, however, is unnecessary, and at times confusing. The extra sheet

is also apt to prove annoying, because of the space it occupies upon

the table. One score is quite sufficient, if it be competently kept,

and each entry, as well as the additions, verified.

There are two totally different types of Auction score-sheets. The one

which is used in perhaps ninety per cent. of the private games, and,

strange as it may seem, in many clubs, has absolutely no excuse for its

existence, except that it was the first to be introduced and has the

reputation of being universally used in foreign countries. It requires

scoring above and below the line, which is a most cumbersome and

dilatory proposition. Keeping tally by this method involves, at the end

of a rubber, long mathematical problems, which, as the scorer is then

in a hurry, frequently result in serious, and at times undiscovered,

mistakes.

The modern system adopted in the up-to-date clubs, in which the game

has received its most scientific development, and in the highest class

of social games, does away with the antiquated methods and exacting

mathematical problems of the above- and below-the-line system, by using

a form of score-sheet which allows and encourages the scorer to

mentally compute simple sums during the progress of the rubber. By the

elimination of complicated figuring, it minimizes the opportunity for

mistake, and delay at the end of the rubber.

All players are doubtless familiar with the old system of above-and

below-the-line scoring, but only three classes now use it:

A. Those who have never had the modern system and its advantages

called to their attention.

B. Those who believe that, having once become accustomed to any

method, it should never be changed for a better.

C. Those who believe that, because foreign clubs adopt a certain

method, we should do the same.

It is probably wasting time to attempt to convert any representative of

either B or C, and fortunately for the intelligence of American card

players there are comparatively few who deserve to be included in

either of these classifications.

Class A, however, comprises the vast majority of Auction players, who

have either never had the modern system of scoring called to their

attention, or, if they have seen it, have not thoroughly grasped its

numerous advantages, and have continued the old method merely because

they were more familiar with it and did not perfectly understand the

new. It is not putting the matter too strongly to assert that every

intelligent scorer, who gives the new plan a thorough test, never

returns to the trials and vexations incident to keeping the tally above

and below the line.

Sample sheets are appended, showing the up-to-date scoring-blank as it

appears at the beginning of the rubber; the same sheet with a rubber

scored, the net totals being computed at the end of each game; and also

with the same rubber scored, the net totals being computed at the end

of each deal. One scorer will prefer to make up his totals at the end

of a game, another will elect to compute them at the termination of

each deal; but either way the advantages of the score-sheet are

apparent.

It goes without saying that any system which allows a player to see at

a glance, not only the score of the game, but also the exact status of

the rubber, is more advantageous than one which, until some time after

the rubber is completed, may leave him in the dark as to whether he is

ahead or behind. Some players allow, whether they or their opponents

are in the lead upon the total score of the rubber, to affect their

declarations and doubles. This practice cannot be enthusiastically

commended, but all must admit that for such players the new scoring

system is most essential.

It is, however, mainly as a labor- and time-saving device that the new

plan is advocated. If any one doubt, let him keep the score of any

rubber under the old method while the same rubber is being scored by

some one familiar with the advantages of the new. The result is sure to

be most convincing. Under the new method, the short sums in addition or

subtraction are mentally computed, during the deal of the cards, etc.

This occupies waste time only, and at the end of the rubber, leaves a

very simple, frequently nothing more than a mental, problem.

It has been estimated that during an evening's play, at least one more

rubber can be completed when the scoring is conducted under the new

method.

The various score-sheets, all showing the same rubber, follow.

SAMPLE OF THE NEW SCORE-SHEET WITHOUT ANY ENTRY

-----------------------------------------------------

OUR SCORE || OPPONENTS' SCORE

-----------------------------------------------------

TRICKS | HONORS | TOTALS || TOTALS | TRICKS | HONORS

=======+========+========++========+========+========

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-----------------------------------------------------

SAMPLE OF NEW FORM OF SCORE-SHEET SHOWING A RUBBER SCORED

WITH NET TOTALS COMPUTED AT END OF EACH GAME

-----------------------------------------------------

OUR SCORE || OPPONENTS' SCORE

-----------------------------------------------------

TRICKS | HONORS | TOTALS || TOTALS | TRICKS | HONORS

=======+========+========++========+========+========

16 | 32 | || | 18 | 72

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| 100 | || | | 30

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

60 | 60 | 268 || 120 | |

=======+========+========++========+========+========

| | (148) || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| 216 | 266 || | 27 | 18

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

20 | 30 | 414 || 145 | 48 | 52

=======+========+========++========+========+========

| | (269) || | | 200

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| 64 | 249 || | | 100

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| 36 | 518 || 356 | 24 | 32

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

21 | 56 | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

36 | 36 | || | |

=======+========+========++========+========+========

| | (162) || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | 250 || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | 412 || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-----------------------------------------------------

The score included in the circle is the _net_ total at the end of

each game. It is obtained by subtracting the smaller score from the

larger; as, for example, in the first game above, 120 from 268, which

leaves a net of 148. If a scorer find it more satisfactory to subtract

when the figures are in line, he can always write the smaller amount

under the larger; as, for example, the 120 under the 268.

SAMPLE OF NEW FORM OF SCORE-SHEET SHOWING SAME RUBBER

SCORED WITH NET TOTALS COMPUTED AT END OF EACH DEAL

-----------------------------------------------------

OUR SCORE || OPPONENTS' SCORE

-----------------------------------------------------

TRICKS | HONORS | TOTALS || TOTALS | TRICKS | HONORS

=======+========+========++========+========+========

16 | 32 | 48 || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || 42 | 18 | 72

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| 100 | 28 || | | 30

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

60 | 60 | 148 || | |

=======+========+========++========+========+========

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

=======+========+========++========+========+========

| | 103 || | 27 | 18

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| 216 | 319 || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

20 | 30 | 369 || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | 269 || | 48 | 52

=======+========+========++========+========+========

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

=======+========+========++========+========+========

| 64 | 133 || | | 200

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| 36 | 69 || | | 100

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | 13 || | 24 | 32

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

21 | 56 | 90 || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

36 | 36 | 162 || | |

=======+========+========++========+========+========

| | 250 || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | 412 || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-------+--------+--------++--------+--------+--------

| | || | |

-----------------------------------------------------

All figures under the head of totals are net, and show at the end of

each deal the exact status of the rubber. It is also possible, when the

above method is employed, to further reduce the amount of bookkeeping

by making only one entry whenever one pair scores honors and the other

a penalty. This method could have been employed above, deal 3 of game

1, by merely entering 70 under "Our Score" Honors, and also in deal 2

of game 3, by entering 64 under "Opponents' Score" Honors.

SAMPLE SHOWING SAME RUBBER SCORED UNDER OLD SYSTEM

WITH LONG ADDITIONS AND SUBTRACTION AT END OF RUBBER

-----------------------

WE | THEY

-----------+-----------

36 |

56 |

36 | 32

64 | 100

30 | 200

216 | 52

60 | 18

100 | 30

32 | 72

===========+============

16 | 18

60 |

-----------+------------

20 | 27

| 48

-----------+------------

21 | 24

36 | ___

250 | 621

____ |

1033 |

621 |

____ |

412 |

===========+============

THE SCORE OF THE RUBBERS IS BEST KEPT ON A SHEET OF

THE FOLLOWING CHARACTER

SCORE BY RUBBERS

-------------------------------------------------------

| NAMES |+|-|||+|-|||+|-|||+|-|||+|-|||+|-|

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-|

| TOTAL | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

-------------------------------------------------------

THE FOLLOWING SHOWS HOW THIS SCORE SHOULD BE KEPT

SCORE BY RUBBERS

---------------------------------------------------------

| NAMES |+|-|||+|-|||+|-|||+|-|||+|-|||+ |- |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++--+--|

| Smith |2| |||2| ||| |2||| |3||| |3||| |2 |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++--+--|

| Jones | |2||| |2||| |6||| |5||| |5||| |6 |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++--+--|

| Brown |2| |||5| |||5| |||4| |||6| |||6 | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++--+--|

| White | |2|||1| |||1| |||2| |||X|X|||X |X |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++--+--|

| Green | | ||| |3|||1| |||1| ||| |1||| |2 |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++--+--|

| King | | ||| |3|||1| |||1| |||3| |||4 | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++--+--|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++--+--|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++--+--|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++--+--|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++--+--|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++--+--|

| | | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | ||| | |

| ------------------+-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++-+-+++--+--|

| TOTAL |4|4|||8|8|||8|8|||8|8|||9|9|||10|10|

---------------------------------------------------------

It is always well to total at the end of each rubber and to note the

size of the rubber. These precautions make it easy to correct mistakes,

should any occur.

XI

THE LAWS

In 1902, some years before Auction had been heard of in the United

States, a number of the best-known clubs of New York, Philadelphia,

Boston, and other cities were represented at a meeting held in New York

for the purpose of drafting a code of Bridge Laws to be used by the

clubs of this country. The so-called "American Laws of Bridge" were

adopted, and duly published. It was then expected that they would be

universally accepted.

In a few months, however, some clubs, including several that had been

represented at the meeting, found that certain penalties of the

"American Laws" were not popular with their members. One club after

another made alterations or adopted its own code, so that the object in

calling the meeting, namely, club uniformity, was soon as far as ever

from being attained. Gradually, however, the various clubs began to

recognize that the Whist Club of New York deserved to be ranked as the

most conservative and representative card-playing organization in the

United States. They realized that it devoted its attention entirely to

card games, and included in its membership not only the most expert

players of the metropolis, but also of many other cities. It was but

natural, therefore, that the admirable Bridge Code of the Whist Club

should be accepted by one club after another, until in the end the

desideratum of the drafters of the American Laws was virtually

obtained.

When, in 1909-10, Auction, with its irresistible attractions, in an

incredibly brief space of time made Bridge in this country a game of

the past, the only Auction laws available had been drafted in London by

a joint committee of the Portland and Bath Clubs. They were taken from

the rules of Bridge, which were altered only when necessary to comply

with the requirements of the new game. It is probable that the intent

of the members of the Bath-Portland Committee was merely to meet an

immediate demand, and that they expected to revise their own code as

soon as wider experience with the game demonstrated just what was

needed.

Under these circumstances, it was to be expected that the Whist Club of

New York would promulgate a code of Auction laws which would be

accepted from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The club, however, did not

act hastily, and it was not until May, 1910, that it issued its first

edition of "The Laws of Auction Bridge." This was amended in 1911, and

in 1912 subjected to a most thorough and comprehensive revision.

Until the adoption of a national code by an American congress of

Auction players, an event not likely to occur, it is doubtless for the

best interest of Auction in this country that the laws of the Whist

Club of New York be generally followed. Uniformity is most important;

otherwise, players from one city, visiting another, are sure to find

local conditions which will, temporarily at least, prove something of a

handicap.

When any improvement is suggested, which, after due trial, meets with

local favor, it would seem wise that such suggestion, whether it

emanate from a club committee or an individual, be forwarded to the

Card Committee of the Whist Club of New York. It may be authoritatively

stated that all such ideas will be cordially received, thoroughly

considered, and, if approved, incorporated in the club code at its next

revision.

Appended hereto will be found "The Laws of Auction Bridge" as published

by the Whist Club of New York, November, 1912. These laws should be

carefully read, if not studied, by every devotee of the game. No matter

how familiar a player may have been with the old laws, he will find an

examination of the new to be advisable, as the changes are both

numerous and important. If it has not been his practice to keep in

touch with Auction legislation, he should realize that a close

acquaintance with the code which governs the game he is playing will

prove most beneficial.

As the laws speak for themselves, it is not necessary to explain them,

or even to point out the various alterations. The wording in many cases

has been materially changed, in order to clarify and simplify. Some

penalties that seemed too severe have been reduced, and certain

modifications have been made which appear to be in the line of modern

thought. Special attention is called to the elimination of the law

which prevented consultation as to the enforcement of a penalty, and

also of the law which provided that when a wrong penalty was claimed,

none could be enforced. The laws referring to cards exposed after the

completion of the deal, and before the beginning of the play, have been

materially changed, and the law covering insufficient and impossible

declarations has been altered and redrafted. A point worthy of special

attention is Law 52 of the Revised Code. It covers the case, which

occurs with some frequency, of a player making an insufficient bid and

correcting it before action is taken by any other player. Under the old

rule, a declaration once made could not be altered, but now when the

player corrects himself, as, for example, "Two Hearts--I mean three

Hearts"; or "Two Spades--I should say, two Royals," the proper

declaration is allowed without penalty.

The laws follow.

THE LAWS OF AUCTION BRIDGE

THE RUBBER

1. The partners first winning two games win the rubber. If the first

two games decide the rubber, a third is not played.

SCORING

2. A game consists of thirty points obtained by tricks alone, exclusive

of any points counted for honors, chicane, slam, little slam, bonus or

undertricks.

3. Every deal is played out, and any points in excess of the thirty

necessary for the game are counted.

4. When the declarer wins the number of tricks bid, each one above six

counts towards the game: two points when spades are trumps, six when

clubs are trumps, seven when diamonds are trumps, eight when hearts are

trumps, nine when royal spades are trumps and ten when there are no

trumps.

5. Honors are ace, king, queen, knave and ten of the trump suit; or the

aces when no trump is declared.

6. Honors are credited in the honor column to the original holders,

being valued as follows:--

_When a Trump is Declared._

3 honors held between partners equal value of 2 tricks.

4 " " " " " " " 4 "

5 " " " " " " " 5 "

4 " " in 1 hand " " " 8 "

4 " " " 1 " {5th in " " " 9 "

5 " " " 1 " {partner's hand " " 10 "

_When no Trump is Declared._

3 aces held between partners count 30

4 " " " " " 40

4 " " in one hand " 100

7. Slam is made when seven by cards is scored by either side,

independently of tricks taken as penalty for the revoke; it adds forty

points to the honor count.[24]

[24] Law 84 prohibits the revoking side from scoring slam or

little slam.

8. Little slam is made when six by cards is similarly scored; it adds

twenty points to the honor count.[25]

[25] Law 84 prohibits the revoking side from scoring slam or

little slam.

9. Chicane (one hand void of trumps) is equal in value to simple

honors, _i.e._, if the partners, one of whom has chicane, score honors,

it adds the value of three honors to their honor score; if the

adversaries score honors it deducts that value from theirs. Double

chicane (both hands void of trumps) is equal in value to four honors,

and that value must be deducted from the honor score of the

adversaries.

10. The value of honors, slam, little slam or chicane, is not affected

by doubling or redoubling.

11. At the conclusion of a rubber the trick and honor scores of each

side are added, and two hundred and fifty points added to the score of

the winners. The difference between the completed scores is the number

of points of the rubber.

12. A proven error in the honor score may be corrected at any time

before the score of the rubber has been made up and agreed upon.

13. A proven error in the trick score may be corrected prior to the

conclusion of the game in which it occurred. Such game shall not be

considered concluded until a declaration has been made in the following

game, or if it be the final game of the rubber, until the score has

been made up and agreed upon.

CUTTING

14. In cutting, the ace is the lowest card; as between cards of

otherwise equal value, the lowest is the heart, next the diamond, next

the club, and highest the spade.

15. Every player must cut from the same pack.

16. Should a player expose more than one card, the highest is his cut.

FORMING TABLES

17. The prior right of playing is with those first in the room. If

there are more than four candidates of equal standing, the privilege of

playing is decided by cutting. The four who cut the lowest cards play

first.

18. After the table is formed the players cut to decide upon partners,

the two lower playing against the two higher. The lowest is the dealer

who has choice of cards and seats, and who, having made his selection,

must abide by it.

19. Six players constitute a complete table.

20. The right to succeed any player who may retire is acquired by

announcing the desire to do so, and such announcement shall constitute

a prior right to the first vacancy.

CUTTING OUT

21. If, at the end of a rubber, admission is claimed by one or two

candidates, the player or players having played the greatest number of

consecutive rubbers shall withdraw; but when all have played the same

number, they must cut to decide upon the outgoers; the highest are

out.[26]

[26] See Law 14 as to value of cards in cutting.

RIGHT OF ENTRY

22. A candidate desiring to enter a table must declare his intention

before any player at the table cuts a card, whether for the purpose of

beginning a new rubber or of cutting out.

23. In the formation of new tables candidates who have not played at

any existing table have the prior right of entry. Others decide their

right to admission by cutting.

24. When one or more players belonging to an existing table aid in

making up a new one he or they shall be the last to cut out.

25. A player who cuts into one table, while belonging to another,

forfeits his prior right of reentry into the latter, unless he has

helped to form a new table. In this event he may signify his intention

of returning to his original table when his place at the new one can be

filled.

26. Should any player leave a table during the progress of a rubber, he

may, with the consent of the three others, appoint a substitute to play

during his absence; but such appointment shall become void upon the

conclusion of the rubber, and shall not in any way affect the

substitute's rights.

27. If any player break up a table the others have a prior right

elsewhere.

SHUFFLING

28. The pack must not be shuffled below the table nor so that the face

of any card may be seen.

29. The dealer's partner must collect the cards from the preceding deal

and has the right to shuffle first. Each player has the right to

shuffle subsequently. The dealer has the right to shuffle last; but,

should a card or cards be seen during his shuffling, or while giving

the pack to be cut, he must re-shuffle.

30. After shuffling, the cards properly collected must be placed face

downward to the left of the next dealer, where they must remain

untouched until the play with the other pack is finished.

THE DEAL

31. Each player deals in his turn; the order of dealing is to the left.

32. The player on the dealer's right cuts the pack, and in dividing it

he must leave not fewer than four cards in each packet; if in cutting

or in replacing one of the two packets a card is exposed, or if there

is any confusion or doubt as to the exact place in which the pack was

divided, there must be a fresh cut.

33. When the player whose duty it is to cut has once separated the

pack, he can neither re-shuffle nor re-cut, except as provided in Law

32.

34. Should the dealer shuffle the cards after the cut, the pack must be

cut again.

35. The fifty-two cards shall be dealt face downward. The deal is not

completed until the last card has been dealt.

36. In the event of a misdeal the cards must be dealt again by the same

player.

A NEW DEAL

37. There _must_ be a new deal--

_a_ If the cards are not dealt into four packets, one at a time and

in regular rotation, beginning at the dealer's left.

_b_ If, during a deal, or during the play, the pack is proven

incorrect or imperfect.

_c_ If any card is faced in the pack or is exposed during the deal

on, above or below the table.

_d_ If any player has dealt to him a greater number of cards than

thirteen, whether discovered before or during the play.

_e_ If the dealer deal two cards at once and then deal a third

before correcting the error.

_f_ If the dealer omit to have the pack cut and either adversary

calls attention to the fact prior to the completion of the deal and

before either adversary has looked at any of his cards.

_g_ If the last card does not come in its regular order to the

dealer.

38. Should three players have their right number of cards, the fourth,

less, and not discover such deficiency until he has played, the deal

stands; he, not being dummy, is answerable for any established revoke

he may have made as if the missing card or cards had been in his hand.

Any player may search the other pack for it or them.

39. If, during the play, a pack be proven incorrect, such proof renders

the current deal void but does not affect any prior score. (See Law 37

b.) If during or at the conclusion of the play one player be found to

hold more than the proper number of cards and another have an equal

number less, the deal is void.

40. A player dealing out of turn or with the adversaries' cards may be

corrected before the last card is dealt, otherwise the deal must stand,

and the game proceed as if the deal had been correct, the player to his

left dealing the next hand. A player who has looked at any of his cards

may not correct such deal, nor may his partner.

41. A player can neither cut, shuffle nor deal for his partner without

the permission of his adversaries.

DECLARING TRUMPS

42. The dealer, having examined his hand, must declare to win at least

one odd trick, either with a declared suit, or at "no trumps."

43. After the dealer has made his declaration, each player in turn,

commencing with the player on the dealer's left, has the right to pass,

to make a higher declaration, to double the last declaration made, or

to redouble a declaration which has been doubled, subject to the

provisions of Law 54.

44. A declaration of a greater number of tricks in a suit of lower

value, which equals the last declaration in value of points, shall be

considered a higher declaration--_e.g._, a declaration of "Three

Spades" is a higher declaration than "One Club."

45. A player in his turn may overbid the previous adverse declaration

any number of times, and may also overbid his partner, but he cannot

overbid his own declaration which has been passed by the three others.

46. The player who makes the final declaration shall play the combined

hands of himself and his partner (the latter becoming dummy), unless

the winning suit was first bid by the partner, in which case he, no

matter what bids have intervened shall play the hand.

47. When the player of the two hands (hereinafter termed "the

declarer") wins at least as many tricks as he declared, he scores the

full value of the tricks won (see Laws 4 and 6). When he fails, neither

the declarer nor his adversaries score anything towards the game, but

his adversaries score in the honor column fifty points for each

under-trick--_i.e._, each trick short of the number declared; or,

if the declaration has been doubled, or redoubled, one hundred or two

hundred respectively for each such trick.

48. The loss on the original declaration by the dealer of "One Spade"

is limited to one hundred points whether doubled or not, unless

redoubled. Honors are scored as held.

49. If a player make a declaration (other than passing) out of turn,

either adversary may demand a new deal, or may allow the declaration so

made to stand, in which case the bidding shall continue as if the

declaration had been in order.

50. If a player make an insufficient or impossible declaration either

adversary may demand that it be penalized, provided such demand be made

before an adversary has passed, doubled or declared. In case of an

insufficient declaration the penalty is that the declarer must make his

bid sufficient and his partner is debarred from making any further

declaration unless an adversary subsequently bids or doubles. In case

of an impossible declaration the penalty is that the declarer is

considered to have bid to take all the tricks and his partner cannot

further declare unless an adversary subsequently bids or doubles.

Either adversary, instead of accepting the impossible declaration, may

demand a new deal or may treat his own or his partner's last previous

declaration as final.

51. If, after the final declaration has been made, an adversary of the

declarer give his partner any information as to any previous

declaration, whether made by himself or an adversary, the declarer may

call a lead from the adversary whose next turn it is to lead; but a

player is entitled to inquire, at any time during the play of the hand,

what was the final declaration.

52. A declaration legitimately made cannot be altered after the next

player has passed, declared or doubled. Prior to such action by the

next player, a declaration inadvertently made may be corrected.

DOUBLING AND REDOUBLING

53. The effect of doubling and redoubling is that the value of each

trick over six is doubled or quadrupled, as provided in Law 4; but it

does not alter the value of a declaration--_e.g._, a declaration of

"Three Clubs" is higher than "Two Royal Spades" even if the "Royal

Spade" declaration has been doubled.

54. Any declaration can be doubled and redoubled once, but not more; a

player cannot double his partner's declaration, nor redouble his

partner's double, but he may redouble a declaration of his partner

which has been doubled by an adversary.

55. The act of doubling, or redoubling, reopens the bidding. When a

declaration has been doubled or redoubled, any player, including the

declarer or his partner, can in his proper turn make a further

declaration of higher value.

56. When a player whose declaration has been doubled wins the declared

number of tricks, he scores a bonus of fifty points in the honor

column, and a further fifty points for each additional trick. If he or

his partner has redoubled, the bonus is doubled.

57. If a player double out of turn, either adversary may demand a new

deal.

58. When the final declaration has been made the play shall begin, and

the player on the left of the declarer shall lead.

DUMMY

59. As soon as the player to the left of the declarer has led, the

declarer's partner shall place his cards face upward on the table, and

the duty of playing the cards from that hand shall devolve upon the

declarer.

60. Before placing his cards upon the table the declarer's partner has

all the rights of a player, but after so doing takes no part whatever

in the play, except that he has the right:--

_a_ To ask the declarer whether he has any of a suit in which he

has renounced;

_b_ To call the declarer's attention to the fact that too many or

too few cards have been played to a trick;

_c_ To correct the claim of either adversary to a penalty to which

the latter is not entitled;

_d_ To call attention to the fact that a trick has been erroneously

taken by either side;

_e_ To participate in the discussion of any disputed question of

fact after it has arisen between the declarer and either adversary;

_f_ To correct an erroneous score.

61. Should the declarer's partner call attention to any other incident

of the play in consequence of which any penalty might have been

exacted, the declarer is precluded from exacting such penalty.

62. If the declarer's partner, by touching a card or otherwise, suggest

the play of a card from dummy, either adversary may call upon the

declarer to play or not play the card suggested.

63. Dummy is not liable to the penalty for a revoke; if he revoke and

the error be not discovered until the trick is turned and quitted,

whether by the rightful winners or not, the trick must stand.

64. A card from the declarer's own hand is not played until actually

quitted; but should he name or touch a card in the dummy, such card is

considered as played unless he, in touching the card, say, "I arrange,"

or words to that effect. If he simultaneously touch two or more such

cards, he may elect which one to play.

CARDS EXPOSED BEFORE PLAY

65. If, after the cards have been dealt, and before the trump

declaration has been finally determined, any player lead or expose a

card, the partner of the offending player may not make any further bid

or double during that hand, and the card is subject to call. When the

partner of the offending player is the original leader, the declarer

may prohibit the suit of the exposed card being the initial lead.

66. If, after the final declaration has been made and before a card is

led, the partner of the leader to the first trick expose a card, the

declarer may, in addition to calling the card, prohibit the lead of the

suit of the exposed card; should the rightful leader expose a card it

is subject to call.

CARDS EXPOSED DURING PLAY

67. All cards exposed after the original lead by the declarer's

adversaries are liable to be called, and such cards must be left face

upward on the table.

68. The following are exposed cards:--

1st. Two or more cards played at once.

2d. Any card dropped with its face upward on the table, even though

snatched up so quickly that it cannot be named.

3d. Any card so held by a player that his partner sees any portion

of its face.

4th. Any card mentioned by either adversary as being held by him or

his partner.

69. A card dropped on the floor or elsewhere below the table or so held

that an adversary but not the partner sees it, is not an exposed card.

70. If two or more cards are played at once by either of the declarer's

adversaries, the declarer shall have the right to call any one of such

cards to the current trick, and the other card or cards are exposed.

71. If, without waiting for his partner to play, either of the

declarer's adversaries play or lead a winning card, as against the

declarer and dummy, and continue (without waiting for his partner to

play) to lead several such cards, the declarer may demand that the

partner of the player in fault win, if he can, the first or any other

of these tricks, and the other cards thus improperly played are exposed

cards.

72. If either or both of the declarer's adversaries throw his or their

cards on the table face upward, such cards are exposed and are liable

to be called; but if either adversary retain his hand he cannot be

forced to abandon it. Cards exposed by the declarer are not liable to

be called. If the declarer say, "I have the rest," or any other words

indicating that the remaining tricks or any number thereof are his, he

may be required to place his cards face upward on the table. His

adversaries are not liable to have any of their cards called should

they thereupon expose them.

73. If a player who has rendered himself liable to have the highest or

lowest of a suit called (Laws 80, 86 and 92) fail to play as directed,

or if, when called on to lead one suit he lead another, having in his

hand one or more cards of the suit demanded (Laws 76 and 93), or if,

called upon to win or lose a trick, fail to do so when he can (Laws 71,

80 and 92), or if, when called upon not to play a suit, fail to play as

directed (Laws 65 and 66), he is liable to the penalty for revoke,

unless such play be corrected before the trick is turned and quitted.

74. A player cannot be compelled to play a card which would oblige him

to revoke.

75. The call of an exposed card may be repeated until such card has

been played.

LEADS OUT OF TURN

76. If either of the declarer's adversaries lead out of turn the

declarer may either treat the card so led as an exposed card or may

call a suit as soon as it is the turn of either adversary to lead.

77. If the declarer lead out of turn, either from his own hand or from

dummy, he incurs no penalty; but he may not rectify the error after the

second hand has played.

78. If any player lead out of turn and the three others follow, the

trick is complete and the error cannot be rectified; but if only the

second, or second and third play to the false lead, their cards may be

taken back; there is no penalty against any except the original

offender, who, if he be one of the declarer's adversaries, may be

penalized as provided in Law 76.

79. If a player called on to lead a suit has none of it, the penalty is

paid.

CARDS PLAYED IN ERROR

80. Should the fourth hand, not being dummy or declarer, play before

the second, the latter may be called upon to play his highest or lowest

card of the suit played, or to win or lose the trick.

81. If any one, not being dummy, omit playing to a trick and such error

is not corrected until he has played to the next, the adversaries or

either of them may claim a new deal; should either decide that the deal

is to stand, the surplus card at the end of the hand is considered to

have been played to the imperfect trick, but does not constitute a

revoke therein.

82. When any one, except dummy, plays two or more cards to the same

trick and the mistake is not corrected, he is answerable for any

consequent revokes he may have made. When during the play the error is

detected, the tricks may be counted face downward, to see if any

contain more than four cards; should this be the case, the trick which

contains a surplus card or cards may be examined and the card or cards

restored to the original holder, who (not being dummy) shall be liable

for any revoke he may meanwhile have made.

THE REVOKE[27]

83. A revoke occurs when a player, other than dummy, holding one or

more cards of the suit led, plays a card of a different suit. It

becomes an established revoke if the trick in which it occurs is turned

and quitted by the rightful winners (_i.e._, the hand removed from

the trick after it has been turned face downward on the table); or if

either the revoking player or his partner, whether in turn or

otherwise, lead or play to the following trick.

[27] See Law 73.

84. The penalty for each established revoke is:--

(_a_) When the declarer revokes, his adversaries add 150 points to

their score in the honor column, in addition to any penalty which

he may have incurred for not making good his declaration.

(_b_) If either of the adversaries revoke, the declarer may either

add 150 points to his score in the honor column, or may take three

tricks from his opponents and add them to his own. Such tricks may

assist the declarer to make good his declaration, but shall not

entitle him to score any bonus in the honor column, in the case of

the declaration having been doubled or re-doubled.

(_c_) When more than one revoke is made by the same side during the

play of the hand the penalty for each revoke after the first, shall

be 100 points in the honor column.

A revoking side cannot score, except for honors or chicane.

85. A player may ask his partner if he has a card of the suit which he

has renounced; should the question be asked before the trick is turned

and quitted, subsequent turning and quitting does not establish a

revoke, and the error may be corrected unless the question is answered

in the negative, or unless the revoking player or his partner has led

or played to the following trick.

86. If a player correct his mistake in time to save a revoke, any

player or players who have followed him may withdraw their cards and

substitute others, and the cards so withdrawn are not exposed. If the

player in fault is one of the declarer's adversaries, the card played

in error is exposed and the declarer may call it whenever he pleases;

or he may require the offender to play his highest or lowest card of

the suit to the trick, but this penalty cannot be exacted from the

declarer.

87. At the end of a hand the claimants of a revoke may search all the

tricks. If the cards have been mixed the claim may be urged and proved

if possible; but no proof is necessary and the claim is established if,

after it has been made, the accused player or his partner mix the cards

before they have been sufficiently examined by the adversaries.

88. A revoke must be claimed before the cards have been cut for the

following deal.

89. Should both sides revoke, the only score permitted shall be for

honors in trumps or chicane. If one side revoke more than once, the

penalty of 100 points for each extra revoke shall then be scored by the

other side.

GENERAL RULES

90. Once a trick is complete, turned and quitted, it must not be looked

at (except under Law 82) until the end of the hand.

91. Any player during the play of a trick or after the four cards are

played, and before they are touched for the purpose of gathering them

together, may demand that the cards be placed before their respective

players.

92. If either of the declarer's adversaries, prior to his partner

playing, call attention to the trick, either by saying it is his, or

without being requested so to do, by naming his card or drawing it

towards him, the declarer may require such partner to play his highest

or lowest card of the suit led, or to win or lose the trick.

93. Either of the declarer's adversaries may call his partner's

attention to the fact that he is about to play or lead out of turn; but

if, during the play of a hand, he make any unauthorized reference to

any incident of the play, or of any bid previously made, the declarer

may call a suit from the adversary whose turn it is next to lead.

94. In all cases where a penalty has been incurred the offender is

bound to give reasonable time for the decision of his adversaries.

NEW CARDS

95. Unless a pack is imperfect, no player shall have the right to call

for one new pack. If fresh cards are demanded, two packs must be

furnished. If they are produced during a rubber, the adversaries shall

have the choice of the new cards. If it is the beginning of a new

rubber, the dealer, whether he or one of his adversaries is the party

calling for the new cards, shall have the choice. New cards must be

called for before the pack is cut for a new deal.

96. A card or cards torn or marked must be replaced by agreement or new

cards furnished.

BYSTANDERS

97. While a bystander, by agreement among the players, may decide any

question, he should not say anything unless appealed to; and if he make

any remark which calls attention to an oversight affecting the score,

or to the exaction of a penalty, he is liable to be called upon by the

players to pay the stakes (not extras) lost.

ETIQUETTE OF AUCTION BRIDGE

In Auction Bridge slight intimations convey much information. A code is

compiled for the purpose of succinctly stating laws and for fixing

penalties for an offense. To offend against etiquette is far more

serious than to offend against a law; for, while in the latter case the

offender is subject to the prescribed penalties, in the former his

adversaries have no redress.

1. Declarations should be made in a simple manner, thus: "One Heart,"

"one No-trump," or "I pass," or "I double"; they should be made orally

and not by gesture.

2. Aside from his legitimate declaration, a player should not give any

indication by word or gesture as to the nature of his hand, or as to

his pleasure or displeasure at a play, a bid or a double.

3. If a player demand that the cards be placed, he should do so for his

own information and not to call his partner's attention to any card or

play.

4. No player, other than the declarer, should lead until the preceding

trick is turned and quitted; nor, after having led a winning card,

should he draw another from his hand before his partner has played to

the current trick.

5. A player should not play a card with such emphasis as to draw

attention to it. Nor should he detach one card from his hand and

subsequently play another.

6. A player should not purposely incur a penalty because he is willing

to pay it, nor should he make a second revoke to conceal a first.

7. Players should avoid discussion and refrain from talking during the

play, as it may be annoying to players at the table or to those at

other tables in the room.

8. The dummy should not leave his seat for the purpose of watching his

partner's play, neither should he call attention to the score nor to

any card or cards that he or the other players hold, nor to any bid

previously made.

9. If a player say "I have the rest," or any words indicating the

remaining tricks are his, and one or both of the other players should

expose his or their cards, or request him to play out the hand, he

should not allow any information so obtained to influence his play nor

take any finesse not announced by him at the time of making such claim,

unless it had been previously proven to be a winner.

10. If a player concede in error one or more tricks, the concession

should stand.

11. A player having been cut out of one table should not seek admission

into another unless willing to cut for the privilege of entry.

12. No player should look at any of his cards until the deal is

completed.

DECISIONS BY THE CARD COMMITTEE OF THE WHIST CLUB OF NEW YORK

Since the adoption of the foregoing code, the Card Committee of the

Whist Club of New York has rendered the following decisions,

interpreting certain laws that have caused discussion. The cases in

question have arisen in various localities,--Number 6, for example,

coming from St. Louis, Number 7 from Northern New York, and Number 8

from Mexico.

CASE 1

A bids out of turn. Y and Z consult as to whether they shall allow the

declaration to stand or demand a new deal. B claims that, by reason of

the consultation, the right to enforce a penalty is lost.

DECISION

Rule 49 does not prohibit consultation. It provides that "either

adversary may demand a new deal or allow the declaration to stand."

This obviously only means that the decision first made by either shall

be final. The old law prohibiting consultation has been stricken from

the code, and the action seems wise, as such a question as, "Will you

enforce the penalty, or shall I?" is really a consultation, and

consequently an evasion of the law.

There does not seem to be any sound reason for preventing partners

entitled to a penalty or choice of penalties from consulting, and as

the laws at present stand, there is unquestionably nothing prohibiting

it.

B's claim, therefore, is not allowed.

CASE 2

A bids two Hearts, Y bids two Diamonds,--B demands that the Y

declaration be made sufficient. Y says, "I correct my declaration to

three Diamonds." B passes, Z bids three No-trumps. A claims that Z has

no right to bid.

DECISION

Law 50 provides that "in case of an insufficient declaration ... the

partner is debarred from making any further declaration." This exactly

covers the case in question. True it is that Law 52 provides that,

prior to the next player passing, declaring, or doubling, a declaration

inadvertently made may be corrected. The obvious intent of this law is

that it shall apply when a player says, "Two Diamonds--I mean, three

Diamonds"; or, "Two Spades--I mean two Royals"; and that such

correction shall be allowed without penalty if the declaration has

really been inadvertently made and neither adversary has taken any

action whatever. We interpret 52 by reading into it the additional

words, "or either adversary calls attention to the insufficient

declaration." The construction put upon 52 by Y would result in

nullifying a most important part of 50.

The claim of A is sustained.

CASE 3

At the conclusion of the play the cards are turned face downward

preparatory to the next deal. It is then discovered that the pack

contains two Queens of Clubs and no Knave of Clubs. The score has been

claimed and admitted, but not recorded.

Is the deal which has just been completed, void?

DECISION

Rule 39 provides that "If, _during the play_, a pack be proven

incorrect, such proof renders the _current_ deal void, but does not

affect any prior score."

"Current" may be defined as "in actual progress," "belonging to the

time immediately passing."

It seems clear, therefore, that as the discovery of the imperfection

did not occur during "the current deal," the result of it becomes "a

prior score," which under the terms of the rule is not affected.

CASE 4

A player belonging to one table expresses his desire to enter another,

and cuts in. At the end of the rubber he claims that he is not obliged

to cut with the others.

DECISION

Rule 24 provides that "When one or more players belonging to an

existing table aid in making up a new one, he or they shall be the last

to cut out." This rule applies only when a player leaves an existing

table to help make up another, when, without him, there would not be

four players for the new table.

When a player leaves a table and cuts into another, his presence not

being required to complete the table he enters, he has the same

standing as the others at that table.

CASE 5

A player belonging to one table expresses his desire to join another,

cuts for the privilege of entering in accordance with Rule 23, and

fails to cut in. At the end of the rubber, must he cut again?

DECISION

By his first cut he lost his rights at his former table and became a

member of the new table; at the end of the rubber he has the right to

enter without cutting.

CASE 6

The bidding in an Auction deal was as follows:--

_1st 2d 3d

Round Round Round_

North 3 Royals Redouble Double

East No No No

South 4 Hearts No Double

West Double 6 Clubs Claims new deal

The deal was played and resulted in the Declarer taking six tricks, a

loss of 600. The question is whether West's claim should be sustained

or this score counted, it being a part of the case stated that the

declaration which was the subject of complaint was made inadvertently.

DECISION

Law 54 provides that "A player cannot redouble his partner's double,"

but does not penalize such action. The prohibition is intended to

prevent an increase in the value of the tricks and a penalty is not

attached, as the additional double is generally a careless act, not

likely to materially benefit the offending player.

It goes without saying that any such double is most irregular, and any

suggestion of strength thereby conveyed will not be used by an

honorable partner. The same comment applies to the remark, sometimes

made, "Partner, I would have doubled if you had not."

A player repeatedly guilty of such conduct, or of intentionally

violating any other law, should be reprimanded, and, if the offense be

continued, ostracized.

In the case under consideration, this question does not arise, as it is

conceded that the act was simply an inadvertence. Even, however, had

its _bona fides_ been questioned, the decision would of necessity be

that the score be counted, as the laws do not provide a penalty for the

offense.

CASE 7

The bidding in an Auction deal was as follows:--

_1st 2d 3d 4th

Round Round Round Round_

North 1 Club 1 Heart 2 Hearts No

East 1 Diamond No Double No

South No No 3 Clubs

West No 2 Diamonds No

South claimed that his partner, having abandoned the Club declaration,

he (South) became the real Club bidder, and, having made the final

declaration, was entitled to play the combined hands.

DECISION

Rule 46 provides that when the winning suit was first bid by the

partner, _no matter what bids have intervened_, he shall play the

hand.

This rule decides the case.

CASE 8

At about the seventh or eighth trick, the left-hand adversary of the

Declarer remarks, "If you have all of the tricks, lay down your hand."

The Declarer does not answer, but continues the play in the usual

manner.

One trick later the same adversary says, "Lay down your hand,"

whereupon almost simultaneously the Declarer and the adversary who has

done the talking place their hands face upward on the table.

The Declarer then states that he can take all the tricks. The play is

not completed, but examination shows one trick may be taken by the

adversaries of the Declarer if he do not finesse in a certain way.

Under these irregular circumstances, should the Declarer lose the

trick?

DECISION

Law 72 provides, "If either or both of the declarer's adversaries throw

his or their cards on the table face upward, such cards are exposed and

liable to be called; but if either adversary retain his hand, he cannot

be forced to abandon it. Cards exposed by the declarer are not liable

to be called. If the declarer say, 'I have the rest,' or any other

words indicating that the remaining tricks or any number thereof are

his, he may be required to place his cards face upward on the table.

His adversaries are not liable to have any of their cards called should

they thereupon expose them."

Section 9 of Etiquette provides: "If a player say, 'I have the rest,'

or any words indicating the remaining tricks are his and one or both of

the other players expose his or their cards or request him to play out

the hand, he should not allow any information, so obtained, to

influence his play, nor take any finesse not announced by him at the

time of making such claim, unless it had been previously proven to be a

winner."

The case under consideration is covered by the first portion of Law 72.

The latter portion of that law does not apply, as the opponent did not

place his cards on the table after a claim by the Declarer.

The law seems clear, the cards of the adversary are exposed and subject

to call--the cards of the Declarer cannot be called.

The etiquette of the game, however, must not be disregarded.

The plain intent of Section 9 and the justice of the case is that, if

the Declarer place his hand on the table claiming the remaining tricks,

he should not receive a doubtful trick unless, when he made his claim,

he contemplated any finesse necessary to obtain it.

If he did not intend to finesse that way, or did not then realize that

a finesse would be necessary, he should, under these circumstances,

voluntarily surrender the trick.

The reason for this is that, should a Declarer claim all the tricks,

the opponent who requires the hand to be played out would naturally

hold the strength; the locus of the request, therefore, suggests the

way to win the finesse.

It is most advantageous for the interest of Auction that, when no real

play remains, time should not be wasted, but neither side should in any

way benefit by an effort to avoid useless delay.

In the case under consideration, however, the adversary suggests that

the hands be placed on the table, and the Declarer may naturally expect

that the only card which might take a trick will drop.

There is no reason to assume that the Declarer will not finesse

correctly, and it is not just that the act of his opponent should

deprive him of the opportunity of so doing.

The decision, therefore, is that the Declarer is entitled to the

disputed trick.

CASE 9

Dummy leaves the table to get a glass of water. As he returns to his

seat, he sees his partner's hand and notices that he is revoking.

Has he, under these circumstances, the right to ask him whether he has

any more of the suit?

DECISION

Law 60 gives the Dummy the right to ask this question, and does not

specify that he must be in his seat to avail himself of the privilege.

Auction of To-day · 第 1 / 3 章