I The Declaration1
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.
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.