HINTS ON AUCTION BRIDGE

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 892, 8 February 1930, Page 26

HINTS ON AUCTION BRIDGE

Bridge In America

Written for 2UE SUN by "Caliban Copyright Ln Neva Zealand.) HAVE recently been studying the lirst number of the new American | publication the “Bridge World. ” This is of considerable interest to L English and oversea British readers, not only on account of its conents, which of their kind, arc admirable, but also because it throws into strong relief the contrast between bridge as it is played in most British countries and bridge as it is played in America. (I assume, in making these omment?, that the “Bridge World 7 ' accurately reflects, as it is clearly •resigned to do, the attitude of the American bridge-playing public.) The first point of contrast that presents itself lies in the evident ■reference of Americans for contract. The majority of the articles in the ew magazine deal with this form of the game. It is evident, too, that ecent literature in the States is mainly designed for consumption by ontract ‘ * fans.' 1 Now I do not believe that contract will ever become as popular a* hat in England. In saying this, I have nu prejudice against it; indeed, I hould prefer personally that it were generally played. But contract is too ifticult a game to suit the “average’ 7 player. He likes auction because t is after all a game in which there is a considerable element of Inch; wo bad players sotting down to play a rubber against two good ones have lways a reasonable chance of beating them hands down. (They have ne hance whatever of beating them in the long run, but the “average 7 ’ dayer i 3 not interested in long-distance probabilities; if he were he would •e a better than average player.) But contract is a game which considerbly widens the gap between the expert and the dud. Hence, for the ; tired business man 7 7 at his club, or for the suburban tea party, contract s a less acceptable game than auction: it wants too much study—too much oncentration —is “too much like hard work. 77 But America recks nothing of these drawbacks. Americans like novelty; they like pep; and they like o be put through the mill. They take their games with an intense eriousness. The difference between auction, as' we play it, and contract, ns he Americans play it, is the difference between cricket and baseball, 'ricket, like our auction, is a game of “glorious uncertainty 77 ; there is a ertain leisurelines'S, a certain haphazardness, about its methods; innovaore. especially those who seek to make it more strenuous or more scientific, <re looked upon with scorn. Baseball, on the other hand, is animated, not so nuch by the spirit that seeks the “sporting chance 77 as by the terrific fficiency of the adding machine. And that formidable elaboration of echnique which characterises high-grade baseball, characterises, similarly, he American presentation of contract. Take, for example, the following introduction by Mr Culbertson (who s incidentally, the editor of the “Bridge World’ 7 ) to the “Best Bid Hand” f the month:— Contract, deal—No Goulash. Both sides vulnerable. Score: Wc3t-East JK). West-East play the Vanderbilt System. South-North—the Forcing System. Standard: All\advaneed players. West—slight weakness for premature penalty doubles. Note—A Kibitzer unwittingly played an important role. Here, you see, we have all the data.. West-East arc playing the 'cnderbilt System; South-North arc playing tlie Forcing System, WesCs * slight weakness 77 has been duly charted; and even the activities of the Kibitzer’ 7 are recorded. (The Kibitzer, I gather, is an onlooker.) ndeed, the only thing lacking is that apparatus of hand-patterns', suitatterns, symmetry percentage*, etc., with which the writings of Mr Vhitehead have familiarised us. This elaboration of technique, fascinating as it is. not unnaturally rikes many English readers as unnecessary and even slightly ridiculous. Suppose I * charted’ a hand as played at my club,” said one of them to le, “how depressing it would appear on paper. Can’t you see me solemnly scording that West-East were playing the. Caliban system, North his own 'jrstem, and South no known system whatever; that we are all rather tibious players; and that West is inclined, in a bad light, to mistake his luba for spades?” And much move to the same effect. In reproducing this perhaps typical criticism, I am not to be takea s« one luring in it. We do not want to lose our sense of proportion (or, what omes to the same thing, our sense of humour), and we do not want to make . business of what is supposed to be a pleasure; but I believe myself that •ve should get a good deal more pleasure out of our bridge—whether auction or contract —if we paid a little more attention to its technique, r'or this reason, one welcomes the devastating efficiency with which—on •ap-r at any rate— -Arne]’icaa experts play their gamr*