Judge — August 1933 — page 19: what you’re looking at

Machine-transcribed from the original scan — historical spelling and the odd misread are preserved.

Judge The Sign-Off By John Rau HE term “Sign-Off” is misunder- stood by a majority of Contract players. They look upon it as being practically a command to their tner to drop the bidding. This view-point is erroneous, The sign-off is not command,—it is a warning. In effect, it says artner, be careful; my hand does not look so very encouraging. Appraise the values in your own hand before proceeding further.” For me to command my partner to pass would be nothing short of blind On the other hand, when I rn him to proceed cautiously, | am ly doing my duty How can I presume to dict partner what he should do thirteen cards? He 1 arrogar te to my with his be in a posi- tion to contract for a game, or possibly a slam, on the merit of his own cards, plus whatever information I have al- ready given him, though, even in the rly stage of bidding, my hand ap- pears to me to be dangerous. ¢ What I am trying to do by my sign- f is to warn my partner that my hand may be unsafe at a high de tion, because it appears to be a misfit; or, that it lacks sufficient high cards or aying facilities to assure that our com- hined holdings have a profitable future. If my partner is alert, he will under- stand that my sign-off is merely a safe- ty suggestion—not a command. It conveys information to him that I have given all the news about my hand in view of his previous bid or bids. Example No. 1 Spades K 10 7 Hearts Q 652 Diamonds A J Clubs AKJ9 With this hand I would open the bidding as dealer with one club. If my partner should now make a one-over-one diamond response, 1 would bid one no trump, because : 1. My club suit cannot be rebid. 2. I cannot mention any other suit. 3. IT am not able to assist his dia- monds immediately. 4. My hand alone is not strong enough to warrant a two no trump rebid. My no trump bid is not a command that the bidding be immediately dropped. On the contrary, I am rather optimistic about the future of the hand so far as game is concerned. | guaranteed certain detinite values to my partner when [ opened the bidding id, obvious! » these values are not ened by the fact that I respond to his bid with one no trump. I shows him that if his h: has a minimum diamond ety lies in a low contract. Natural- ly, if his hand is not a minimun should make some further bid. bly he will mention ano’ nd response our Tossi- ter suit which in support, or he might even bid two d trumps. In either case I will then be in a position to guide the hand to its proper destiny, assured of the fact that we will have a reasonably good y for the ultimate declar: Remember this very informative pect of opener’s sign-off, when, having as- bid a suit, he replies to a one-over-one by bidding one no trump. He does not merely say, “I am signing off.” If he is playing the Sims system and has ened the bidding as dealer or in see- ond position, he also says, “Since [am ible to rebid my suit, or to bid a sec- ond suit, you know my hand is of the defensive Therefore you count on me for at least three prin tricks, probably reinforced with protective intermediates. It is only my distribution which type. may prove disap- pointing. The next move is up to you.” Example No. 2 Spades 5 43 Hearts 10 6 Diamonds 9: 2 Clubs K 9 8 7 5 3 My partner opened the bidding with one no trump, and T held the above h 1 responded with two clubs, over which my partner bid two no Mps. The information conveyed by a rebid of clubs would be decidedly pessimistic. I felt that the hand would be safer at three clubs than at two no trumps. I therefore bid three clubs,—a sign-off. My partner must bear in mind before he prolongs the bidding: 1. My sign-off. My hand may very well contain no entry to establish my club suit. 2. The time factor. Can he estab- lish our club suit before the opponents can clear a suit of their own? 3. The safety factor. If we are to incur a penalty on this hand, it. will probably be lighter at three clubs than at three no trumps. If he is able to satisfy himself that 17 our hands fit for no trump play despite my warni trump declara due to his original no ion being partially based upon his club holding, and if he is also assured that he has sufficien: ntrol of the ti factor as regards each of the other suits, only then should he bid three no trumps. Under these conditions he is likely to experience little difficulty in making his contract Culbertson in England E\ RAC from an article in The Evening Standard, London, by Mr. Frank England: “One of the foremost objects of the British League is to dis- courage in any shape or form profit or the commercialization of in this country. The extrava- stakes suggested by Mr. Culbert dition to the ar ement of other private r out abhorrent. to the British Bridge League and in direct conflict with their main object - Another suggestion of Mr. Culbert- to the personnel of the English team that he will meet is the last straw. He has stated publicly in the Press sev- eral times that unless certain players are included, he re the ight to refuse to play the selected team. “Imagine Woodfull coming over here and suggesting to the Selection Com- mittee that he will not play another Test series unless Dash and Blank are included! 1 think the M. C. C. would Enough of all Henceforth let us see to it that dge is purely British, that we e our own affairs and that we support the Bridge League, which is the only body which has any national status whatever, “Tt indeed time that a stand be i merican methods of pub- ly-hoo.” as a necessary ¢ rang ratches as in the Press are named ves have something to say. this. our manag SOTHER London newspaper c ping: ‘ ‘Insults’ To Bridge P' Mr. Culbertson Is Told Where He s Off. The battle of Contract Bridge es on with renewed vigor. Mr. A. Manning-Foster, President of the In- ternational Bridge League, has leaped to the criticism of Mr. Ely Culbertson’s icism in a letter to the Editor of the ily Express.’ “Mr. Culbertson who, with his wife, is here to play the first international match for America against England, complained that the opposing team se- lected was not representative of Eng- land. A new team was selected. Mr Culbertson approved. He thought last week's international play by England was ‘lousy’, comicbooks.com