Dubious Logic

When I use a word...

With a playing population healthy dotted with lawyers and mathematicians it is no surprise that bridge finds itself using words that, echoing Lewis Carroll's character, means just what they are chosen to mean - neither more nor less. In print I have been careful not to offend the new standards; I always refer to a hand as a collection of thirteen cards and a deal (or board at duplicate) when I mean the full fifty two.

With people at the table it becomes more fraught. I well remember several years ago having a useful result reversed by the director because we described a bid of 2NT as a transfer to 3♣ when, though partner might have held that suit, he need not have done and it was simply an instruction to make that call. Such a convention is properly known as a puppet. It was a serious contest and we were expected to know the difference - a transfer bid promises a holding in a specified suit.

Why so picky? Well, if the burden of discovering the meaning of the auction falls on the opponents it puts them in an unfortunate position where the questions they have to ask may be influenced by their holdings; so, if you use a shorthand to explain yourself, you must be accurate. That is why it is so much better to give a brief description; the 2NT bid should have been described as "showing a long suit and weak hand and requiring 3♣ which partner might pass or correct". Much more sensible than relying on names like 'Astro', 'Michaels' or even, 'Acol', meaning the same to your opponents as they do to you.

This deal provided some provocation to these remarks:

Three hearts was described as a 'fit-bid'. That's where we differed; from the East seat I expected five or more hearts and the other two honours in dummy together with the implied spade support – South professed that just a top card with any length was sufficient. So I looked it up: fit showing jump/bid – "show[s] both length in the suit bid plus support for partner's suit".

While the discussion was going on declarer was giving the play her full attention. My club lead went to the ace and partner switched to the heart eight, nine, ten and ace. A successful trump finesse followed and another to draw all ours, then club king and a third spade to dummy to try a heart to the queen. I was able to cash another heart but then had to start diamonds. If partner had the diamond nine a low card was correct so that's what I played and now North no option but to win the ace and run the ten – game scored and nicely played.

Published Saturday 6.Aug.2005