more tricks, the concession should stand." There is no law affecting
this situation, and, therefore, the section of Etiquette above quoted
clearly covers the first portion of the query.
As to whether good sportsmanship would require the Declarer, under such
circumstances, to voluntarily surrender any of the tricks to which he
is entitled by law, does not seem to produce a more serious question.
It is true that the adversaries, by overlooking a possible play, made a
concession that was not required, and that the Dummy noticed the error
of the adversaries. Why, however, should the Dummy be obliged to
correct this error any more than any other mistake of his opponents?
It is perfectly clear that, had a similar error been made by the
Declarer, the Dummy could not have saved himself from suffering by
reason of it, and, whether the question be either a strict
interpretation of law or of sportsmanship, it is a poor rule that does
not work both ways.
Both parts of the query are, therefore, answered in the affirmative.
CASE 11
The Declarer leads three rounds of Trumps, on the third an adversary
refuses.
Later in the play the Declarer leads a winning card which is trumped by
the adversary who has refused Trumps.
The player who trumped the trick gathered it.
The Declarer said, "How did you win it?"
The player answered, "I trumped it."
The Dummy then said, "Who trumped it?"
After this remark by the Dummy, the Declarer claims a revoke, the claim
is disputed upon the ground that the Dummy called the revoke to the
attention of the Declarer. The Declarer states that he would have made
the claim, regardless of Dummy's remark.
Query: Should the revoke be allowed?
DECISION
Law 60 prescribes explicitly the privileges of the Dummy after he has
placed his hand on the table.
There are exactly six things which he may do and no more.
Law 61 provides, "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."
Inasmuch as asking "Who won the trick?" is not one of the six
privileges allowed the Dummy, such action is irregular, and must, of
necessity, call attention to the revoke. Had the Dummy actually claimed
the revoke, it would preclude the exaction of a penalty, even had the
Declarer been about to claim it. It is, therefore, immaterial whether
the Declarer would have noticed the revoke had the Dummy not made the
irregular remark.
The question is decided in the negative.
CASE 12
The adversaries of the Declarer take ten tricks, but revoke. Under
these conditions, can either side score "except for honors or chicane?"
DECISION
Law 84 provides that "a revoking side cannot score, except for honors
or chicane."
It also provides: "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."
It is evident that the Declarer is given the option of either scoring
150 points or taking three tricks, should he prefer to make good his
declaration rather than receive the bonus.
In the case cited, three tricks could not fulfill the contract, but
should a thoughtless or generous Declarer elect to take a penalty which
would not benefit him, in preference to 150, he would be acting within
his rights.
The rule clearly decides this case. The adversaries "cannot score
except for honors or chicane," and the Declarer can "add 150 to his
score in the honor column" if he elect so to do.
Acknowledgment is made of the courtesy of The Whist Club of New York in
permitting the publication of its code of laws and of the decisions of
its Card Committee.
SUMMARIZED PENALTIES
For the benefit of those who wish to hastily ascertain the penalty for
an offense or to refer to the law upon the subject, the following table
of summarized penalties has been prepared. It does not include every
possible penalty, but merely those of most frequent occurrence.
OFFENSE PENALTY LAW
Revoke by Declarer 150 points 84 _a_
Revoke by Adversary 150 points or 3 tricks 84 _b_
Revoke by Dummy None 63
Second revoke in same hand 100 points 84 _c_
Lead out of turn by Declarer None 77
{ Exposed card
Lead out of turn by Adversary { or 76
{ Called lead
Card exposed during deal New deal 37 _c_
{ Partner cannot bid nor
Card exposed after deal and { lead suit of card and card 65
before end of bidding { may be called
{ May be called and if exposed
Card exposed after end of { by Third Hand that suit 66
bidding and before lead { not be led
Card exposed { Declarer None 72
during {
play by { Adversary May be called { 67
{ 72
Two or more cards played at All may be called 70
once by adversary
Not playing to trick New deal 81
Playing 2 cards to trick Liable for revoke 82
Playing with less than 13 cards Liable for revoke 38
Holding 14 cards New deal 37 _d_
Misdeal New deal { 36
{ 37
Dealing out of turn or with May be corrected before 40
wrong cards last card is dealt
Declaration out of turn New deal 49
Double out of turn New deal 57
Pass out of turn None 49
Insufficient declaration Made sufficient and partner 50
debarred from bidding
Impossible declaration Made 7 tricks and partner 50
debarred from bidding; or
new deal; or previous
declaration may be made final
Dummy's calling attention to Penalty for offense 61
eliminated any offense
Dummy's suggesting a play It may be required or 62
prohibited
Declarer's naming or touching May have to play it 64
card in Dummy
Adversary's calling attention Partner may be required to 92
to trick play highest or lowest card
or win or lose trick
Giving information about Called lead 51
bidding after final bid
Fourth Hand playing before Second Hand may be required 80
Second to play highest or
lowest card or win or lose
trick
Cutting more than one card Must take highest 16
APPENDIX
QUERIES AND ANSWERS
The introduction of the count now in use has produced so radical a
change in the game of Auction that of necessity innumerable differences
of opinion have arisen among individual players.
Many questions have been submitted to arbitrators for decision. In some
cases the author of AUCTION OF TO-DAY has been complimented by being
called upon for his opinion, and a few queries that seem to be upon
points of general interest, with the answers given, follow.
QUERY
What is the correct original bid of the Dealer in the following cases?
1. Seven Diamonds, headed by Knave, Ten; Ace of Spades; Ace of
Hearts; Ace and three small Clubs.
2. The same hand, except that the Clubs are Ace, King, and two
small.
3. The same two hands, with the Diamonds headed by Queen, Knave,
Ten.
ANSWER
These hands are evidently conceived for the purpose of proving
vulnerable the rule that a suit should not be called without the Ace or
King. They doubtless never did and probably never will occur in actual
play, but most aptly illustrate a point of declaration, and are,
therefore, worthy of consideration.
It must be remembered that in the extraordinary case any convention of
declaration may be varied to suit the hand. Undoubtedly, the last rule
to permit exception is that above mentioned. For the purpose of
emphasis it may properly be said to be without exception, and yet, if
any such holding actually happen, it may become necessary for the
Declarer to take a little leeway. It cannot affect the confidence of
the partner if a player, only under such extraordinary circumstances,
departs from the conventional, and the remarkable character of the hand
guarantees that harm will not result in the particular instance.
All of the above hands contain three Aces, yet a No-trump should not be
bid, as it would probably be left in, and with two singleton Aces they
are dangerous No-trumpers, but strong Diamonds.
The hands are much too strong to call one Spade, as that also might not
be overbid. Two Spades followed by Diamonds would be quite
satisfactory, would avoid breaking the rule, but would not include the
effort to eliminate adverse bidding which, with a hand of this
character, might be desirable.
Two Diamonds is not permissible, as that is the conventional call for a
solid Diamond suit.
There is no reason, however, that three or more Diamonds or Clubs
should not indicate a long weak Trump suit with such additional
strength that one Spade is an unsafe call. Such a bid would suggest
that a game is probable in the suit named. It is not a recognized bid
and would rarely be used, but an intelligent partner would at once
grasp its meaning.
The answer to the above, therefore, is
1. Three Diamonds.
2. Three, or even Four, Diamonds. (The bid of one Club might be
left in.)
3. Three or 4 Diamonds in first; 4 in second.
QUERY
Would it not improve the game of Auction and increase the amount of
skill required in the declaration if the value of Royal Spades be
altered from 9 to 5?
ANSWER
The basic theory of the present count is to equalize, as nearly as
possible, the value of the five declarations, in order to produce the
maximum amount of competition in bidding. This has proved most popular
with the mass of players, and has been universally adopted not only in
this country, but also in England, France, and Russia. To decrease the
value of the Royal Spade from 9 to 5, would be a distinct step
backward. In that case it would take 4, instead of 3, Royal Spades to
overbid two No-trumps; and 6, instead of 4, to overbid three No-trumps.
It is not likely that any change, which diminishes the ability of the
holder of Spades (or of any suit) to compete with a No-trump, will ever
appeal to Auction devotees. The greater the possibility for competitive
bidding, the greater the opportunity for displaying skill in that
branch of the game.
QUERY
Should the Dealer bid one Club, holding Ace and King of Clubs, four
small Spades, four small Hearts, Ace, Queen, and one small Diamond?
ANSWER
No. One Club deceives the partner. It indicates length in Clubs, and
may induce him to advance that suit too far. In the event of an adverse
No-trump, it will probably result in the lead of the partner's highest
Club, which is apt to prove extremely disastrous. One No-trump is far
safer than one Club, and might be defended on the ground that with four
cards in each of the two weak suits the danger of a long adverse run is
reduced.
One Spade, however, places the Dealer in a splendid position to advance
any call his partner may make, and is doubtless the sound bid.
QUERY
Is it not an objection to the count now in use that the Spade suit is
given two values, and would it not be wise to make Spades 9, and allow
the Dealer to pass the original declaration?
ANSWER
The advisability of this plan was thoroughly considered before the
present count was suggested. It would make a pass by the Dealer equal
to the present declaration of one Spade, and in the event of the four
players all passing, presumably would necessitate a new deal. It would
eliminate two, three, and four Spade bids by the Dealer and Second
Hand, and the double of one Spade by the latter.
It would relieve the Third Hand from determining whether to take his
partner out of one Spade, and take from the Fourth Hand the decision of
whether to play for a penalty of 100 or try for game. It is evident,
therefore, that it would take a great deal out of the bidding of every
one of the four players, and it is hard to believe that any scheme
tending to decrease the variety of, and amount of skill required for,
the declaration, is to the advantage of the game.
The objection to having two Spade values is purely theoretical, as
players are not in the least embarrassed thereby, nor is the number of
declarations at present a part of the game cumbersome or confusing. The
argument, that if there be two Spade values there might equally well be
two values for each of the other suits, almost answers itself. Having
more than one Royal declaration would of necessity result in
complications, and, of course, only one defensive call is needed. With
the advantages of the Spade bid so numerous and evident, and with no
real disadvantage apparent, there does not seem to be any sound reason
for abandoning it.
QUERY
Dealer bids one Royal. Second Hand holds Ace, King, Queen, Knave, and
Ten of Clubs; Ace, King, and two small Diamonds; Ace and two small
Hearts; one small Spade. What should he bid?
ANSWER
Three Clubs. The holding thoroughly justifies a No-trump, as the hand
contains eight sure tricks. If, however, the partner cannot stop the
Spades, the adversaries will save the game at once, while eleven Club
tricks is not an impossibility. Furthermore, the partner may have the
Spades stopped if _led up to_ him, but not if led _through_
him.
The Declaration of _three_ Clubs (one more than necessary) tells the
partner the situation, and accomplishes two purposes:--if the partner
have not the Spades stopped, the game is still possible; if the partner
have the Spades stopped, if led up to him, it instructs him to call two
No-trumps, whereas a No-trump bid by the Second Hand, with the same
cards, might fail to produce game, because the position of the opening
lead would then be reversed.
QUERY
Dealer bids one No-trump; Second Hand, two Hearts. Third Hand holds
Spades Knave, Ten, and three small
Hearts One small
Diamonds Two small
Clubs Ace, Queen, Knave, and two small
What should be bid?
ANSWER
Two Royals. This hand, especially with an adverse Heart call, is much
more apt to go game at Royals than at No-trump. Two Royals asks to be
let alone; three Clubs practically commands the partner to bid two
No-trumps if he have the Hearts stopped.
This is but an expansion of the principle that the original call of one
Club or one Diamond suggests a No-trump, while one Heart or one Royal
indicates a desire to try for game in the suit named.
QUERY
Is it fair for partners to agree that the bid of one Spade shall mean
weakness; one Club, general strength; and two Clubs, strength in Clubs?
ANSWER
It is perfectly fair for players to use the above-described, or any
other convention, provided their adversaries understand its meaning.
Conventions are an essential part of Auction. The lead of a King to
show the Ace is a convention--so is every informatory play or
declaration. When plays or bids are generally understood, it is
unnecessary for players to explain their significance, but the
adversaries should have all the information upon the subject possessed
by the partner, and nothing approaching a private understanding should
exist.
QUERY
The Dealer bids one No-trump, holding
Spades Ace, Queen, Ten, and three small
Hearts Ace, Queen
Diamonds Ace, and one small
Clubs Ace, and two small
Second and Third Hands pass; Fourth Hand, two Diamonds.
What should the Dealer declare on the second round?
ANSWER
Two Royals. The hand is far too strong to pass, while to bid two
No-trumps is foolish, as, unless the partner hold the King of Spades,
it is almost certain that the contract cannot be fulfilled.
Two Royals is safe and presents a good chance of game. A game in Royals
is far more valuable than 100 for Aces, which may be reduced, if not
wiped out, by penalties for under-tricks.
QUERY
Score, Love. Dealer bids one Spade; Second Hand, one Diamond; Third
Hand, one Royal; Fourth Hand, two Clubs.
Second round, Dealer bids two Royals; Second Hand, three Clubs; Third
Hand, three Royals; Fourth Hand, four Diamonds.
Dealer holds
Spades Knave, 10, 7
Hearts King, Knave, 8
Diamonds 7, 4, 3
Clubs King, 7, 6, 3
Should he double the four Diamond declaration?
ANSWER
A bid of four Diamonds should never be doubled at a love score unless
the Doubler be reasonably sure of defeating the declaration. In this
case he may expect to win one Club, and possibly one Heart, although
that is not sure. Either the Declarer or the Dummy may be without
Spades. The double does not seem reasonably safe and may keep the
partner from a successful bid of four Royals. The Dealer, therefore,
should pass.