The second player (by which is meant the player on the dealer's left) is
quite certain that the bidding will come round to him again; therefore he
never opens his mouth unless he is sure that it is to his advantage to do
so. All that the dealer has done, therefore, is to shift on to his
partner's shoulders the _onus_ of opening, which is disadvantageous for the
double reason that the new opener is debarred from One Spade, and that the
second player has been given an unnecessary option.
The exceptional cases in which, under the convention, it is agreed that the
dealer shall make a genuine call are (1) when he has a _moderate_ or
"guarded" No-trumper, when he is to declare One No-trumps; (2) when he has
a strong suit to the ace, king, of Spades or Clubs, when he is to declare
two in the strong suit as an invitation to partner to make a No-trumper.
Now, as it is conceded that to call first under such {254} circumstances is
an advantage, why give second player the option of enjoying the same
advantage, which he might not otherwise have had?
By this convention, if it be adopted, the limitation of loss, under Law 51,
is voluntarily annulled.