March 2007 - 8

Letters to the Editor

to indicate they make off-shape takeout doubles (not showing support for
all unbid suits) with minimum values.
This promotes bad bridge.
When the doubler bids his own suit
if he doesn't like partner's response,
it should show extras, but that is not
always the case. It should at least be
required for the doubler to have extra
values if he bids his own suit.
Players who make minimum offshape takeout doubles should be
required to Alert, with the explanation being that the double doesn't
promise support for all unbid suits
- and that no extra values are promised if the doubler bids his own suit.
ANITA CARLSON
Hickory NC
Your opinions, readers?

Help needed
To the Editor:
The ACBL appears remiss in its responsibility to color-blind members.
Unlike the original metal boards
with their inscribed NV and Vul.
designations, the plastic boards designating red for vulnerability and green
for non-vulnerable cannot be distinguished by the color-blind. When I
play with one of my partners who is
color-blind, I have to advise him of
the vulnerability on every board after
explaining to the opponents why this
is necessary.
Would it not be possible to stamp
the boards with the vulnerability so
as to correct this problem.?
ROBERT CONOT
Thousand Oaks CA
The ACBL Tournament Department
reports that there have been no comments one way or the other about the
boards in nearly 15 years of use.

Keep claim rule
To the Editor:
I disagree with Mr. Kim about playing out the contract when someone
claims (January, page 7). Recently, a
claim was made without explaining
that the declarer would draw trump

8

first. By following the law, it was
decided that a loss of another trick
resulted.
If the declarer was allowed to
continue play after being challenged,
trump would have been drawn
because it was then obvious that a
trump was still out.
Mr. Kim's suggested change could
be unfair to the defenders. Keep the
law the way it is. A claim should be
specific and play should cease.
ART FLORACK
Fredericksburg VA

the convention card is packed as it is,
perhaps the design could be altered
slightly to allow room next to 2
and 2NT, or even 3, for blue transfer check boxes, as well as red lines
for those who use such bids for other
conventions.
I like this rule: If it's a transfer, Announce it. I wonder what others think
about this idea.
JESS JURKOVIC
New York NY

VPs and win-loss
To the Editor:
I would like to personally thank
Bobby Wolff for the 30-point victory
point scale (January, page 36). I have
been on both sides of the 3-1 versus
4-0. I have always thought that taking the victory away from a team
that wins all of its matches is inherently wrong. I know that sometimes
teams get better draws, but what
usually happens is a lesser-ranking
team works hard and wins all of its
matches while a stronger team wins
big but loses a close match.
The day my team won against a
team captained by one of my students, I changed to the 30-point scale.
I knew how hard they had worked for
those four wins only to be told they
came in second. Never again. The
win-loss format would be preferable
to the disappointment I saw in their
faces.
BILL KOEHLER
Albuquerque NM

To the Editor:
If an ACBL goal is to encourage
new players to play duplicate bridge,
why complicate their experience by
requiring the Announcement of the
high-card point range for only one
bid: 1NT, the first bid most players
learn.
Point-count ranges for many bids
have changed over the years - all
two-level opening bids, for which 2NT
is a perfect example, and there is no
requirement to Announce that range.
Inconsistencies cause confusion
and tend to take people out of their
comfort zone.
I understand the rationale (Ruling
the Game, March 2004), but I feel
that those who use a 1NT opening
range out of the ordinary should be
the ones to make the Announcements,
not the ones who learned the notrump
range in chapter one and find that for
some reason they have to tell others
at the table.
MARCIA McCALDEN
Vail CO

Announce it

Problem solver

To the Editor:
I play four-suit transfers with most
of my regular partners (2 is clubs,
2NT is diamonds). One partner, when
I use these responses, simply says
"transfer" instead of the required
"Alert." When I say Alert, on the
other hand, and people ask, I explain
it's a transfer.
I advocate eliminating redundancy
by saying "transfer" for these bids as
one does with 2 and 2. Though

To the Editor:
A letter last year suggested that
playing cards be printed in different
colors to avoid mixing the suits. Years
ago, I proposed that diamonds should
be printed in a bold red outline but
otherwise white. The same with
clubs, except the outline would be
bold black. No changes to spades and
hearts. That would solve the mixing
problem.
CARL WITKOVICH
San Mateo CA
r

Simplify

Bridge Bulletin
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of March 2007
