March 2006 - 7

Letters to the Editor

become a very important part of our
lives.
B.J. ZUCCARELLI
Staten Island NY

Limits needed
To the Editor:
I disagree with Jonathan Shuster
(November, page 6) in his accusation that the ACBL is guilty of age
discrimination.
In recent years ACBL has instituted programs to attract younger
members. You have to establish
age ranges for high school and
college players. Educational institutions offer study opportunities for
all ages. Just because a person is
registered as a student does not
qualify that person as a "youth." I
was critical a few years ago when
ACBL permitted a couple of Life
Master PhD students to compete in
an intercollegiate event just because
they were doing some research and
were registered as "students."
I strongly support ACBL's establishing age limits for high school
students and for college-age participants. High schoolers have enough
qualms about competing against
older "adults." As for college
ages, you have to draw the line
somewhere.
ROBERT CHAPMAN
Cape Coral FL

Get real
To the Editor:
In the November bidding contest,
East, the dealer, picked up:
K - A K Q J 6 3 2 A K 10 5 2
After opening 2, each East
conducted a scientific auction and
ultimately made an outright guess of
the best contract.
Science revealed that West had a
dreadful hand and a few diamonds
(and that North-South were asleep).
East made the guess to bid 6,
which proved to be a good contract.
I would have made the guess to
open 6, even in a bidding contest.
I wouldn't have had to guess later,
and my opponents would have had a
terrible time figuring out what to do.
I think that if East let his opponents
into the bidding, you might have
March 2006

given his opponents some bids. Today
people interfere in power auctions
with nothing more than a little distribution, and they certainly had that.
What hands could North and
South possibly have held not to
come into the bidding. With normal
distribution, they could make 10
tricks in their 11-card suit. I know
you don't want to annoy the pairs
invited to participate in your bidding
contest, but I think there should be a
little realism in such contests.
Thanks for bringing in a four-card
major pair, and thanks even more
to the Covalciucs for using those
methods.
SIDNEY LORVAN
Pacifica CA

Destructive bidding
To the Editor:
In the November issue (page 40),
Jerry Helms presented a good discussion how to judge overcalling a
three-level preempt. It seems you
must also know if they are using
standard preempts, not "destructive"
preempts such as the one mentioned
by Mike Flader in the same issue
(page 38). He cautioned players who
make a 3 preempt with a hand
such as
J 7 6 5 4 7 4 8 3 2 J 4 3,
that they must Alert, have it marked
on their card, etc., although he notes
that they could get away with that
once.
As a newcomer (playing many
years, but only 100-plus masterpoints), I view this kind of
destructive bidding as ruining the
game for everyone - and it does
seem to be more common these days.
STEVE KOKKINS
Marion MA

Better mousetrap
To the Editor:
Regarding the Bidding Lab article
on the adjunct to Flannery (December, page 28), the author offers an
excellent use of a three-of-a-minor
response to Flannery as a game try,
but an improvement suggests itself.
Because of what a Flannery opening reveals about opener's hand, it
should usually be dummy, but the

method given will have the Flannery
bidder declaring all heart contracts.
It may be better to have the Flannery bidder decline with 3 if
available, and accept by "raising"
partner's minor.
This will right-side all major-suit
contracts except for the sequence
2-Pass-3-Pass; 3 (when
responder doesn't correct to spades),
while minimizing the chances of a
useful lead-directing double in the
game-going situation.
DAVID BABCOCK
Coral Gables FL

Play, then think
To the Editor:
I suggest that bridge is a tough
game, but it is to be played with
consideration for the opponents.
On a few occasions, I try a finesse
when I lead from my hand and I
have the queen and ace of the suit
in the dummy. The player on my
right holds his card in his hand from
which he will play to the trick. What
bothers me is that he holds the card
and holds the card and then finally
plays the king on my queen. I have
shown my displeasure for such a
tactic. The answer that I receive is,
"Oh, I am thinking of what card I
will play next." Can my opponent
play the king and then think?
JOE BYRNES
Ottawa ON

More fair
To the Editor:
At a recent regional I was overjoyed to learn that the stratification
system for Swiss teams was changed
from one based on the highest
individual masterpoint holding on a
team to an average of team members.
I have always felt that the former 
Letters to the editor are welcome
by regular mail, e-mail editor@acbl.
org or fax 901-398-7754. Brevity is
considered a virtue, as is subject
matter with relevance to a majority
of ACBL members. Unsigned letters
are not considered for publication,
so please include your name and
hometown. Letters may be edited.
All letters will receive a response.

7
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of March 2006
