August 2007 - 8

Letters to the Editor

a match by 1 is a random two‑way
guess for a queen for an overtrick.
For this, we give a team that guessed
it right a huge bonus?
When you win a match 13-12, it
is generally not because your team is
better. It is usually a matter of luck.
Inferior teams beat better teams all
the time in Swiss teams. In a short
match, when your opponents bid a
25% game that makes, you will usu‑
ally lose the match. Victory points
give these vagaries of luck a chance
to even out throughout the day, letting
skill shine through. I'd rather reward
a team that played great all day and
was unlucky in a match or two than a
team that squeaked by with repeated
assistance from Lady Luck.
MIKE DEVELIN
Berkeley, CA

Excitement
To the Editor:
Recently, two students in my bridge
class came to me privately to tell
me that they had been playing at the
In‑Between Club (Sarasota FL) in
the newcomer section. This is a fine
ACBL club run by Michelle Golden,
who has won an award for recruiting
new players. My students proudly
told me that the first time they played,
they came in fifth. The second time,
they placed fourth, and the last time,
they were second.
At the end of the lesson, I an‑
nounced to the class what Esher Chen
and Caroline Miller had achieved. It
was a real joy to see how they both
beamed with joy and pride. I some‑
times think that more experienced
players forget how much pleasure
bridge can bring into one's life.
PHYLLIS PRAGER
Sarasota FL

Keep it simple
To the Editor:
I checked the scores for the two
competing pairs in the Bidding Box
competition in the March issue (page
29). I compared the scores for what
would have been achieved using the
Bridge Bulletin recommended auc‑
tions. Marilyn Garcia and Spike Lay
scored 50. Kerri Sanborn and Irina
8

Levitina finished with 40. A pair
using the Bridge Bulletin auctions
would have scored 52.
My conclusion is that the Bridge
Bulletin system, essentially Standard
American, is as good as any.
Taking it another step, I maintain
that every auction has a bearing on
the play. A pair employing an exotic
system has an unfair advantage be‑
cause of their intimate knowledge of
their system. This body of knowledge
cannot be comprehended by an op‑
ponent simply by saying, "We play
XYZ system."
A game is fair only if all use the
same language. This behooves our
leaders to improve our common
language. I look forward to the day
when every bridge club displays a no‑
tice: "Only standard bridge is spoken
here."
DOV MALKIN
Los Angeles CA
Be careful in drawing conclusions
from one set of hands. Even if the actual competitors were using a system
more similar to the Bridge Bulletin's,
judgment is still a key element of the
contest. The standard system, applied
conservatively, will not always fare
as well.

Goren's kibitzer
To the Editor:
Earlier this year, you published
bridge stories from days gone by. It
reminded me of an incident at the In‑
dividual Bridge Championship at the
McAlpin Hotel in NYC about 1950.
My wife and I were new bridge
players and we saw an announcement
in the newspaper that Charles Goren
would be playing in this tournament.
We wanted to see this bridge giant so
we went as observers. I don't know
how major tournaments are today, but
at that time we were allowed to watch
Mr. Goren.
He had just finished playing with a
lady who complained that she did not
know what his bid meant. He nicely
said, "Madam, no one ever doesn't
know what my bids mean."
A few boards later, Goren bid 6.
My wife asked why he played the
contract the way he did. He started to
explain, but my wife interrupted and

asked why he didn't play it in a way
she described. He smiled and said,
"Young lady, you don't want to know
how or why I played the hand the way
I did. You want to tell me how you
think I should have played the hand."
We left shortly thereafter.
Every once in a while, when my
wife is correcting me about my play
and won't listen to me, I say, "You
wouldn't even listen to Goren." This
statement doesn't faze her.
We stopped playing about 40 years
ago when it looked like bridge would
end our marriage. Finally, a few years
ago, we ended the husband‑wife
bridge feud and began to play again.
We absolutely love the game, but still
argue a bit. And unfortunately, we lost
a lot of years to improve our game.
JOSEPH F. BAUMAN
Boca Raton FL

Get in there
To the Editor:
I joined the ACBL in 1962 while
serving in the U.S. Army. By 1963, I
had returned to civilian life. I had 25
masterpoints.
With three of my newcomer bridge
friends, I traveled from Baltimore to
Philadelphia to play in a District 4
Regional. On Sunday, there was one
event, a two‑session board‑a‑match.
There were about 100 teams. Ours
had fewer than 300 masterpoints.
We finished 19th overall and won
3.50 red points. This was accom‑
plished against the likes of Ozzie
Jacoby, Arthur Robinson, Robert Jor‑
dan, Norman Kay, Sidney Silodor, et
al. It thrilled me to be able to join an
organized competitive activity that al‑
lowed rank beginners the opportunity
to meet and compete against such
great players.
My advice to Scott Chupack (May,
page 8) is to forget about "being
destroyed" and start enjoying the
challenge of playing against bet‑
ter competition. It will help him to
improve as a player. If he's lucky,
he may even make some friendships
among those experts and be able to
approach them for bridge advice.
FRANK MASTROLA
Swansea MA
Bridge Bulletin
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of August 2007
