HINTS ON AUCTION BRIDGE

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 898, 15 February 1930, Page 28

HINTS ON AUCTION BRIDGE

The Play Of The Hand Against A Suit Declaration (I) (Written for TUB SU.V fry "Caliban."—Copyright In hew Zealand .t IHAVE been asked several times recently what general principles should apply when one is playing the hand against an adverse suit declaration: and, particularly, wliat one’s opening lead should be. “When I am opening the attack against a no-trumper,” says one of my correspondents, “I know usually what to do: either I must open the suit which has been called by my partner, or I mast lead the fourth best card, or an honour, of my own best suit. But I nearly always find myself stumped as to how to open up the game when my adversaries have declared trumps'. Are there no simple rules that you can give us?’’ The answer, I think, is that this particular element of the game is certainly not reducible to “simple rules.’’ The only thing one can say with certainty (as has been remarked in other contexts) is that there is nothing certain to be said. At the same time, I can, perhaps, offer some suggestions, in' this and subsequent articles, which will enable those who are confronted with this ever-recurring problem to tackle it more eonfidently next time they meet with it. I would point out, first of all, that the problem is really a two fold one. The leader, that is, must ask himself these two questions: (1) how many tricks is it imperative for me ’> attempt to make? (2) what line of play will afford me the best chance of making that number of tricks? As regards fl), one can speak more or less dogmatically. It should be borne in mind that one’s campaign ia directed, not to one single objective, but to a series of objectives; and that some of these are more important than others. The most important objective, obviously, is to prevent one’s adiersaries from making game. The next most important objective is to prevent their making their contract. (t distinguish between these two because situations often arise in which one has the choice of alternative lines of play: a line of play which will save the game, but which will enable one’s adversaries to make their contract; and a line of play which affords ono an opportunity of defeating the contract, at the cost, if it fails, of the loss of the game. In such cases the former line of play should obviously be chosen.) ’The third objective, where it is certain that neither nf the first two can be attained, is to prevent one’s adversaries from making a slam. Or alternatively, the third objective, where it is certain that both the first two can be attained, is to defeat the contract by an many tricks as possible. In the first instance, then, one’s plan of campaign will" depend upon the relative urgency of these various objectives, account being taken 1) of the calls which have preceded the declaration; (2) of the declaration itself; (3) of the state of the score; and (-1) of the known psychology and idiosyncracies of the various players. And now arises the second question: how, once the objectives in view kave been determined upon, is one to attempt to attain them? I will try ♦o show next week that the opening lead, and the plan of campaign which it is the leader's job to formulate, will depend upon the relative importance of the various “tactical elements’’ in his hand. And by “tactical elements” 1 mean the various features of the hand —quick tricks, estabilthable tricks, singletons, and so forth—whUh are important from an attacking point of view.