diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 02:01:37 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 02:01:37 -0700 |
| commit | 27bfce2160ac9f7195f8b88ad76385d3f19abb03 (patch) | |
| tree | 571d2a8465e88d5d9c7f5569a14af12216f6e334 /23086-8.txt | |
Diffstat (limited to '23086-8.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 23086-8.txt | 7171 |
1 files changed, 7171 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/23086-8.txt b/23086-8.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c497971 --- /dev/null +++ b/23086-8.txt @@ -0,0 +1,7171 @@ +The Project Gutenberg eBook, Auction of To-day, by Milton C. Work + + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + + + + +Title: Auction of To-day + + +Author: Milton C. Work + + + +Release Date: October 18, 2007 [eBook #23086] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 + + +***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AUCTION OF TO-DAY*** + + +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 reëntry, 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 reëntries, 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 reëntry, 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 reëntry. 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 reëntry. + +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-à-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 reëntries. + +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 reëntry. 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 reëntry materially +affects the manner in which he should open his long suit. By a reëntry +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 reëntry, as the suit may not be led three times. + +The reason for varying the lead, depending upon the presence of a +reëntry, 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 +reëntry, 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 +reëntry, 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 reëntry; 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 reëntry, therefore, is compelled to open +with the Queen, so as to establish the suit, while the partner, who +probably has a reëntry, 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 Reëntry Reëntry + + 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 reëntry, 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 reëntry. + +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 reëntry, 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 reëntries, 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 reëntry 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. + +Section 9 of Etiquette provides that Dummy shall not leave his seat for +the purpose of watching his partner's play; but even should he do so, +his breach of etiquette would not deprive him of the rights given him +by law. + +An adversary may unquestionably object to the Dummy watching the play +of the Declarer. + +That, however, is not the case under consideration. The penalty for the +revoke is the most severe in Auction, many think it unreasonably so, +and a player is unquestionably entitled to every protection the law +affords him. + +The decision, therefore, is that, under the conditions named, the +question may be asked. + + +CASE 10 + +With three tricks to play, the Declarer throws his cards face upward on +the table, claiming the remaining tricks. His opponents admit his +claim, and the score is entered. The Dummy then calls the attention of +the table to the fact that, had a certain lead been made, the Declarer +could not have taken all the tricks. + +Query: Under the circumstances, is the Declarer entitled to all the +tricks; first, viewing the question solely from a strict interpretation +of the laws; and second, from the standpoint of good sportsmanship? + + +DECISION + +Section 10 of Etiquette provides, "If a player concede in error one or +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. + + + +***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AUCTION OF TO-DAY*** + + +******* This file should be named 23086-8.txt or 23086-8.zip ******* + + +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: +http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/3/0/8/23086 + + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://www.gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://www.gutenberg.org/about/contact + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: +http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + |