10) Learn How to Shuffle the Cards:-

Many people have difficulty shuffling playing cards, and this can be problematic when playing at a table without a professional dealer – such as in home games or self dealt games (where each player takes it in turn to shuffle and deal). The solution to this problem is to get a pack of playing cards and learn how to shuffle – which is the objective of these card shuffling tutorials.

Over the years I’ve sat next to lots of players who say “I can’t shuffle” or “excuse my poor shuffling”. If they’re really bad then someone usually offers to shuffle for them, for which they’re usually grateful. If you fall into this minority of poker players then now is the time to learn. You probably can’t shuffle because you’ve never been taught the correct techniques. While you may think shuffling cards looks hard or complicated, it’s actually fairly easy.

The Riffle Shuffle (in the hands)

This is a great way to shuffle cards. While this shuffle looks impressive, it’s actually far easier than you might think. Yes, I’ll admit it does take some getting used to, but once you have a feel for the cards it’ll be second nature.

1:	2:	3:	4:
5:	6:	7:	8:
9:	10:	11:	12:

The Handling

Important Points / Tips

The Table Riffle Shuffle

This is a simple shuffle which you will see performed at the casinos or poker rooms. The reason this shuffle is used is because it is very effective and it is impossible (depending on the dealer) for the players to see exposed cards. The previous shuffles often give other players a chance to glimpse at the bottom card.

1:	2:	3:	4:
5:	6:	7:	8:

The Handling

1. Start by lifting off about half the deck with the right thumb.
2. Move the packet over to the right and hold each packet with the thumbs placed on the inside edge, index fingers lightly on top, and the remaining fingers at the corners of the front edge.
3. The thumbs now lift up the edges of each packet. This is supported by applying pressure with the index fingers of each hand.
4. The corner edges of the two packets should be nearly touching as the thumbs now riffle up the edges of each packet
5. The cards should now be shuffled neatly into each other.
6. Push the two packets together.
7. Square up the pack and repeat the shuffle if necessary.
8. Here is an image of the closed shuffle, see below for more info.

Important Points / Tips

• This shuffle can be done in several ways. It can be done open or closed. What I mean by open or closed is the way you position your hands. I prefer the open style because it is handled in a more open manner. If you look at dealers in a casino or poker room then you’ll see that they often use the closed method. This method is sometimes called the dovetail shuffle.
• I’d suggest experimenting and see which method you prefer.

8) Revokes  -  Laws 61 to 64

1) WHO CAN ASK WHOM ABOUT A POSSIBLE REVOKE?

ANYONE except dummy can ask ANYONE; dummy can only ask declarer.   Dummy and defenders are warned that asking could give UNAUTHORISED INFORMATION.

2) WHEN IS A REVOKE ESTABLISHED?.

(a)   When the Offender or his Partner makes any play to the next trick OR

(b)   If the Offender or his Partner designates in any manner a card to be played to the next trick.

3) CORRECTION OF A REVOKE.

A player must correct a revoke if in time to do so, that is before it becomes established. 

When correcting a revoke, the revoke card is withdrawn and a legal card substituted.   If that card is a Defender's card, it becomes a MAJOR penalty card.

4) WITHDRAWING A CARD PLAYED.

Each member of the NON-OFFENDING side may withdraw a card he has played after the revoke and BEFORE attention was drawn to it.   The PARTNER of the OFFENDER is also entitled to withdraw his played card, BUT ONLY if his RHO does so.

5) PROCEDURE WHEN A REVOKE IS ESTABLISHED.

How many tricks did the OFFENDING SIDE win from the revoke trick onwards (INCLUDING the revoke trick)?

  (a)   NONE  :  there is no Penalty

  (b)   ONE  :  PENALTY ONE TRICK is transferred.

  (c)   TWO or MORE: Did the revoke card with the revoke trick?                                                                

           YES  :   PENALTY TWO TRICKS                     transferred.                                                                      

            NO  :   PENALTY ONE TRICK transferred.

Tricks are transferred as shown to the opponents at the end of the hand.   If the revoke penalty is insufficient compensation for the non-offenders the Director may RESTORE EQUITY.  

7) HESITATIONS & UNAUTHORISED INFORMATION (Laws 16 & 73):

Examples of Partners' actions which may convey "unauthorised information" during the auction are:

        * A remark or question.  

        * An answer to a question.

        * Special emphasis, or tone of voice.

        * A gesture, movement or mannerism.

        * An unmistakable hesitation (or undue haste) before calling.

Other actions which may convey "unauthorised information" are:

      * Looking at the wrong hand.

       * Overhearing calls, remarks or results from other tables.

       * Seeing another player's cards.

When a players has unauthorised information from other sources, not Partner, he should let the Director know.   The Director may:

       a)   Adjust positions (e.g. allowing the board to be played arrow-switched if East has seen some of North's cards).

    b)   Allow the board to be played, cancelling the board later if he decides it necessary.

     c)   Cancel the board immediately.

If he cancels the Board he will give artificial adjusted scores.

           XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

5) DUMMY'S RIGHTS (Laws 42 & 43).

DUMMY is NOT allowed to:

        (i) Ask a Defender about a possible revoke.

        (ii) Look at an opponets System Card during the play of a hand.

        (iii) Draw attention, before the hand is over, to any irregularity, once it has been committed.

        (iv) Point out how many tricks have been won or lost.

        (v) Suggest the Director be called before another player draws attention to an irregularity.

        (vi) Take any part in the play of the hand except to play the cards as Declarer tells him.

        (vii) Look at Declarer's hand or curtain card.

        (viii) Look - at his own initiative - at any card in a Defender's hand, ask any question or make any comments on the hand.

        (ix) Leave his seat to watch Declarer's play. 

DUMMY IS allowed to:

        (i) Keep track of tricks won or lost.

        (ii) Warn one of the players he has put a quitted card in the wrong direction, but only until the next trick has started.

        (iii) Try to prevent Declarer from committing an irregularity.   e.g. saying "Are you not in Dummy" when he is about to take a card from his hand.   BUT it would be too late to warn him once he has 'played' the card.

       (iv) Try to prevent Declarer from establishing a revoke, e.g.saying 'Having no clubs?'

       (v) Try to prevent an irregularity on the part of a DEFENDER.

       (vi) Call the Director if one of the other three players draws attention to an irrregularity.

       (vii) Give informmation as to fact or law when the Director is present BUT not to ask questions even if the Director is present.

       (viii) Draw attention to any irregularity once the hand is completed.

        xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

4) BGB Sims - Are they biased against East/West?

The recent BGB Sims caused some consternation at the Oxshott Bridge Club!! When the scores were submitted to ECatsBridge, all the North/South Pairs were uprated by about 6% and all the East/West Pairs were dpwngraged by around 6% compared to the local score. What was the reason for this, you might well ask? Were all the easy Boards made available to only the North/South Pairs? Or did all the "poorer" Players sit on the East/West axis at Oxshott?

Peter Wardle has taken on the job of researching the solution and here is his response:-

3) Eliminating the Bias in Scoring at Oxshott:

During this year's Tilling Trophy Compatition, there were some suggestions that there might be a bias in our Scoring system at Oxshott Bridge Club favouring North/South Pairs. The Scorer requested help from Peter Wardle and he has provided an excellent anaysis with recommendations to improve our Scoring for the future.

Here is the initial request sent to Peter:-

From: Mike Sadler [mailto:sadler252@btopenworld.com]
Sent: 17 March 2011 10:32
To: 'WARDLE'
Cc: 'Eric Austin'; 'George Gardiner'; 'Susan Sadler'
Subject: Eliminating the Bias in Scoring

Peter,

            You seem to know quite a bit about the “ins” and “outs” of scoring for Bridge. I wonder if you could help by giving explanations to the following two Questions:-

1)       Do we have a bias towards N/S in our scoring at Oxshott in the Tilling Trophy?

2)       How many Rounds should be “Arrow-switched” to most fairly develop a single Leaderboard between N/S and E/W? Is there a fairer system for establishing one “Order”?

The background for these Questions arises out of your excellent work trying to explain the recent BGB Sims scoring. Well, last night we had Round 6 of our Tilling Trophy (the annual Pairs Championship competition) at the Oxshott Bridge Club. There were 14 + ½ Tables present and, as usual, we played 12 Rounds of two Boards with an “Arrow-switch” for the last two Rounds. Now the players playing East were boasting about receiving great hands while the players playing North were belly-aching about not having a hand to play all evening. When the results were computed, it turmed out that those Pairs playing North/South performed better than those playing East/West; indeed SIX out of the top SEVEN on the final Leaderboard were playing North/South. That has raised the thorny question AGAIN, which you addressed before, about the suspicion that there is a bias against East/West in the scoring – as we examined in the recent BGB Sims competition.

Now, I have looked through the results of the six Rounds that we have played this year of the Tilling Trophy to see whether there is a consistent unevenness in the results between N/S and E/W. Here is the result:-

                        Round                          Number of North/South

                                                                        Pairs featuring in the Top Ten

6                                                                                       7

7                                                                                       6

8                                                                                       7

9                                                                                       7

10                                                                                   6

11                                                                                   3

As you can see, in five of the six Rounds, the Pairs playing North/South have featured in more than half of the Top Ten placings on the final Leaderboards. Indeed over the six Rounds they fill 60% of the Top Ten placings. How can this be explained?

Secondly, I came across a short article in one of the Bridge magazines recently that recommended that, in order to fairly establish a single ranking from an evening’s Bridge, it was best to “Arrow-switch” for one-quarter of the Rounds played. This article offered no justification or explanation as to why this was the best number. Do you have any information as to the fairest method of arriving at a single Leaderboard on such occasions? Is there a better way for us to determine our Pairs Champion for the Year at Oxshott?

            I know that everyone found your answers on the BGB Sims questions to be very interesting. I hope that you will be happy to attempt an answer to these Questions, and allow me to use them also on the Website, so that everyone can learn.

            Hope all goes well with you.

                                    Kind regards,

                                                Mike

 The responses from Peter Wardle make interesting reading:-

Mike,

I have now completed a similar analysis for the 12 and 14 table Mitchell movements used at Oxshott. The analysis of the 12 table movement (with tables 1 and 1 sharing boards and with a relay) has taken a lot of time because, unlike the 13/14/15 table movement, it is not symmetrical and this means that the “fairest” number of arrow-switch rounds varies according which pair’s point of view is considered – I have done the calculation from each pairs point of view and then taken an average to arrive at a recommendation as to the “fairest” number of arrow-switch rounds.

The definition of fairness relates to the number of times that each of the other pairs have played the same hands  as a particular pair. Ideally the number would be the same for each of the other pairs – but this is not possible because of the nature of the movements and the number of pairs playing etc.

The following is an extension of the table in my earlier email to include the 14 table movement.

You will see that for 13, 14 and 15 tables the “fairest” result is achieved when 3 out of the 12 rounds are “arrow-switched”.

In the case of the 12 table (share and relay movement) the average standard deviation (“STDV”) over all 24 pairs is lowest when 4 out of the 12 rounds are “arrow—switched”

Please let me know if you have questions about the above or would like a more detailed explanation of the calculations.

Regards,

Peter Wardle

From: WARDLE [mailto:wardle_1@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 10 May 2011 20:29
To: 'Mike Sadler'; 'Eric Austin'; 'George Gardiner'; 'Susan Sadler'
Subject: RE: Eliminating the Bias in Scoring

Mike,

As discussed I have now completed the analysis for a 15 table Mitchell movement (without relay or board sharing). Whilst doing this analysis I realised that I could use Standard Deviation (a statistical function which describes the degree of scatter about an average value) as a proxy for “fairness”. This is on the basis that if the movement is totally “fair” then every other pair in the room will have shared the same number of hands as a given pair. The following table summarises the impact of the number of arrow-switch rounds upon the standard deviation for the number of boards shared with each of the other pairs in the room – the lower the standard deviation the “Fairer” the result.

You will see that in both cases the “fairest” result is obtained when 3 rounds out of the 12 are arrow-switched. In no case is a completely “fair” result obtained since there are always a spread in the number of hands shared with the different pairs in the room – once again, this is where the skill lies in sitting at a table which lies between two tables occupied by weak pairs!

If someone can provide me with the details of the share/relay for 12, 14 and 16 table Mitchell movements, I will do a similar analysis for these rounds.

Regards,

Peter

From: WARDLE [mailto:wardle_1@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 04 May 2011 16:33
To: 'Mike Sadler'; 'Eric Austin'; 'George Gardiner'; 'Susan Sadler'
Subject: RE: Eliminating the Bias in Scoring

Mike,

As I mentioned to you last time we saw each other, I was going to do some further analysis and have a further think about the issues raised by your interesting question, but that I wouldn’t be able to complete the analysis before I went on holiday. I’ve now been able to complete things (though it has taken a lot longer than I had hoped as I’ve been completing and submitting an OU End of Course Assessment) and this email is a summary of my analysis and thoughts.

In an ideal world, if one was trying to rank all the pairs in a club session, each pair should have played some of the hands that each of the other pairs in the room have played (ideally the number of hands in common should be the same for all the other competing pairs). This is clearly not achieved when playing a Mitchell movement without arrow-switching. The Howell movement (where both N/S and E/W move) is inherently better HOWEVER it is better suited to situations where there are only a small number of tables (the normal number of tables at Oxshott means that it is not really an option) AND it does tend to confuse people (more people moving and people sometimes get confused about where they should move to).

Thus if trying to get a single result list for a club event the normal approach is to adopt arrow-switching (for multi-club events the Ecats approach of combining the EW and NS results is the only viable option). We then come to the question you raise about the number of rounds which should be arrow-switched to get the “fairest” result.

Firstly whilst arrow-switching can help equalise things a bit by increasing the number of pairs that have played some of the same hands (board and direction) as a particular pair, it is not perfect since it doesn’t help even up the number of hands that one has played against each pair playing on the evening concerned. To demonstrate this I have looked at an example where there are 13 tables and 24 boards are played (12 times two boards) in a simple Mitchell movement. There are 26 pairs (#1-#26, of which #1-#13 play NS in round 1 and #14-#26  play EW in round 1) and I have looked at which pairs have played the same hands as pair #1.  The analysis is easier to do than explain, so I apologise if the following explanation is difficult to follow – just ask if you need clarification.

What can be seen from the above table is that in this particular example arrow-switching never gives a truly “fair” result in that there are always differences in the number of boards on which one pair’s performance is directly measured against the other pairs. It is clear that a single round of arrow-switching is insufficient as there is one pair who have never played any of the same hands as pair #1. In the range of 2-5 arrow-switched rounds the “fairness” (as measured by the minimum number of boards on which the other pairs have played to same hand as pair #1) improves. However in this example, when the arrow-switch is made at the 50% point we get back to a situation where two pairs have not played any of the hands played by pair A!!!!

It is also clear from this analysis that where one sits is very important – ideally one wants to sit so that there are two weak pairs sitting in the same direction on the table on either side of the one where one is sitting (this is because these pairs will be the ones who play the maximum number of the same hands played by pair #1). This confirms what I have said in my earlier emails – the choice of table/direction having regard for where the strong pairs are going to  be sitting can affect ones chances of getting a good result.

This analysis is specific to a 13 table simple Mitchell movement and the impact of arrow-switching is likely to vary according to the number of tables (particular where there are an even number of tables as there will either be a skip, a relay of board-sharing between tables). For competitions such as the Tilling trophy where you want a single winner and decide to achieve this by arrow-switching you should have a minimum of 2 rounds of arrow-switching and it is probably best to arrow-switch after (N*0.5-1) rounds where N is the number of rounds to be played in the course of the evening.

Regards,

Peter

P.S. Please note the correct to my earlier email – I missed out “NOT” in the penultimate sentence

From: WARDLE [mailto:wardle_1@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 17 March 2011 13:09
To: 'Mike Sadler'
Cc: 'Eric Austin'; 'George Gardiner'; 'Susan Sadler'
Subject: RE: Eliminating the Bias in Scoring

Mike,

Many thanks for this interesting question. I can’t claim to be an expert but am interested in statistics and the mechanics of the scoring system and will attempt to put an answer together. I’ll need a bit of time to look at the data and reflect on things, but I do have an initial thought on a possible explanation.

In common with most (if not all) clubs, you use a “free seating” system (i.e. pairs decide where they are going to sit). I suspect that there is a preference to sit North/South if possible (avoids the disruption of moving). I know from my point of view that I prefer to sit N/S because my partner and I get alternating opportunities to open the bidding, whereas for E/W one of the pair doesn’t get a chance to open the bidding until at least half-way through the evening (if the pair are of different skill levels, then whether or not the weaker partner gets the opportunities to open the bidding can affect their results) .

If the best/keenest players get to the club earlier than the others and chose to sit N/S then there could be a North/South bias when an “arrow-switch” is not used. If this does play a role in the “N/S” bias then you could consider using a random allocated seating system so that pairs play roughly the same number of times N/S and E/W.

Regards,

Peter

1) Doubling for take out:  by Grahame Weir*

A)  The Theory:-

When we first learn Bridge and we are introduced to the concept of

Doubling, normally it is explained as a method of extracting more points (double) from the Opposition as we are quite sure that their proposed contract will fail. This double is referred to as the “Penalty Double”. Originally I suppose that was the sole use of the double. However in the modern game we are now confronted by many different uses of the double. I think the most popular use these days is the “Take-out Double”. I will try to give a few pointers on how to use this type of double to good effect in the modern game.

Just to get back to the penalty double quickly, it is common that a double

of 1NT is for penalties; I would suggest that you always double 1NT when you can. If the Opposition are playing a 12-14pt NT you should have 15 or more points to double. The rule of thumb is that you should always have one more point than the maximum NT range used by the Opposition (e.g. if the opposition play 14 –16  NT, you should have 17+pts to double etc.) Although it is the responsibility of the Bidders to announce their No Trump range (since August 2006), it is worthwhile to check your Opponents’ NT range before play, since they sometimes forget to announce their convention.

So this is a straightforward penalty double and most players realise this;

however when you introduce take out doubles things can become slightly more complicated. You need to work out guidelines with your partner when doubles are for penalties and when they are for take out. A nice rule to use is ALL doubles are for take out up to 3ª unless the opposition or yourselves have bid No Trump’s.

* This article was first shown on the website of the Pershore Bridge Club. Thank you, Pershore Bridge Club, for your contribution to our website enjoyment.

B)  The Practice:-

Here are some examples to help understand when to use a Double

and what your Partner means by the Double:-

North                          East                             South                          West

1)               1§                               P                                  1©                               X ? 

2)               1¨                               X?

3)               1©                               X?                               1NT                             X?

4)               1¨                               1NT                             2©                               X?

5)               1©                               P                                  1NT                             X?

6)              1ª                               X?                               P                                  P?                   

1)      In Example 1 your Double is clearly for the unbid suits. You should have at a minimum of  4/4 in ¨/ª’s and probably 12+pts (incidentally with 5/5 in the unbid suits you can bid 2NT Michaels style )

2)      In Example 2 you should have 11+ pts and shortage in ¨’s (no more than 2!).  You should also try to have at least 4/4 in the majors

3)      As you can see the Double has been used twice in this example; the first Double by E is the same as example 2 and should be 11+pts and at least 4 Spades. After the South hand bids 1NT, West’s Double is now for penalties showing a nice hand with points but West has no fit for East’s suits and so would prefer to try and take a penalty.

4)      In example 4, Partner has bid 1NT showing 15 – 18 pts balanced (a limit bid). South has then bid 2©. Your double should therefore be for penalties as No Trumps have been bid (even though it was by your side).

5)      In this example, Double should show a Penalty Double (however some Pairs play this as a take out  double of  1©). Sorry but this is the rule being broken – that’s Bridge!

6)      In the final example Partner has shown 11+pts and length in the other suits – you have left it in – therefore you have converted the Double to penalties – so you must have a trump stack and no fit for Partner… possibly this type of hand:-  ªKQJ983 © 8 ¨J65 §654  All take out Doubles can be converted if you hold a very good suit of the Opponents proposed trumps.

Let’s look at the concept a little further then. Take-out suggests that you would like partner to bid a suit, and that you don’t have more than 2 cards in the suit(s) bid by the opposition.

Lets say RHO (right hand opposition) opens 1ª and you hold:

ª3   ©KQ43  ¨AK32  §QJ43  This is a perfect hand to make a takeout Double.

Whatever suit Partner bids, you will have a fit for and you can compete & maybe push the opposition too high, or even bid a game yourself.

At this point it is worth mentioning that some Partnerships use a Double of an opened suit by the Opposition to show opening values or even opening values and interest in the opened suit. I would recommend that this system should be scrapped, as double for take out gives you much more scope to land in the correct contract.

If   RHO opens 1© and you hold: ªA3 ©KQ3 ¨J1098 § QJ32  I would suggest that you PASS – you do not have enough points to bid 1NT ( 15 – 18 ) and you don’t have a good enough suit to bid at the two level, you just have to hope that Partner bids and then you can support them or that you may take the Opposition off in their contract. If you double to show opening values your Partner will bid ª’s most of the time and you may get into all sorts of trouble. The hardest bid to make in bridge is PASS !!

The majority of Pairs use takeout Doubles these days. However there is some confusion as to what to do next ..…Here is a useful guide about how far to compete after partner has made a takeout Double.

Lets say LHO bids 1§ and your partner Doubles for take out. You can trust that partner has 11+pts and probably 0/1 §’s  ( 2 on a bad day ) and that they have at least 4/4 in ©/ª’s and at least 3 ¨’s. So RHO passes and the ball is in your court. Now firstly Partner could have any number of points maybe 11 or maybe 20!  So its up to you to tell Partner about your hand.

I would suggest you always jump with 8+ pts and an 8 card fit. ( or extreme shape)

So if you have ªKQ45 ©A32 ¨9876 §43  you should jump to 2ª (your Partner will have 4 ª’s ) if you are sticking to the rules. If Partner does not have 4ª’s then they should have 16+pts and very good suit of their own.

Just to clarify this point, if you hold  ªAKQJ54  ©AQ ¨J98 §87 and RHO opens the bidding 1¨ , you should Double in the first instance and then bid ª’s – this shows a hand with 16+ and a really good suit , that was too strong to just overcall 1ª on the First Round in fear of missing game. Some of you will play strong jump overcalls and a bid of 2ª’s will also show this hand type. However far more common is a hand with distribution and 11 – 15pts.

If you have less than 8pts – you can just bid your best fit at the lowest level, 

e.g.  ªQ945 ©A32 ¨9876 §43 – you should just bid 1ª. If partner does have a big hand 18+ then they can bid 2ª as a game try. At this point you could have a zero count and Partner should try not to jump to 3 or 4ª’s. Remember you have forced your Partner to bid; they are not obliged to hold any points.

C)  The Quiz:-

Now for the FUN!! So using these rules try this test and see how you do?

Write down your bids for the eleven examples and see if you can score 110 points. Once you have written down your Answers, you can check out how well you scored by turning to Section X below where the solutions are presented.

You are playing East and North is the Dealer with both Pairs vulnerable.

North opens 1♠ . Sitting as East, you possess the hand shown in the Question. What would you bid or call next? For example would you bid next:- 1NT or Pass or Double or 2 of a suit or something else? – and you must specify which suit if this is your choice. Write your answer to each question on a piece of paper.

Q1)                  ªJ92               ©KQJ3           ¨QJ2               §KJ5

Q2)                  ªJ                   ©KQJ2           ¨K876                        §AJ32

Q3)                  ªKQ93           ©AJ65             ¨J76                §AJ

Q4)                  ªA                  ©KQJ543       ¨KQ2             §Q32

Q5)                  ª32                 ©AQ3             ¨KQJ93          §J109

Part 2 of the Quiz:-

You are playing East and South is the Dealer with both Pairs vulnerable. South opens 1§ and your Partner playing West Doubles. North passes. Sitting as East, you possess the hand shown in the Question. What do you bid next? For example would your next bid be 1D/H/S (please specify) or 1NT or Pass or Double or 2 of a suit (specify) or something else (specify). Write your answer to each Question on the piece of paper.

Q6)                  ªQJ8              ©KQ3             ¨QJ765           §43

Q7)                  ªA7654          ©KQ32           ¨3                   §543

Q8)                  ªK102                        ©Q10              ¨J652              §K1098

Q9)                  ªJ9876           ©A653                        ¨543               §4

Q10)                ª4                   ©J54               ¨J72                §KQJ987       

Q11)                ªvoid              ©QJ98765      ¨J8765            §8

So how did you do?

You can score your own Answers by writing them on a separate piece of paper and comparing them with the "model Answers" set out in Section X below. Scroll down now to see how you performed. Good luck!!

6) Card Played (Law 45):

A.   Play of card from Hand.

Each Player except Dummy plays a card by detaching it from his hand and facing it on the Table immediately before him. The exception is for the opening lead which is first made face down. The Partner of the Leading Player should say: "No questions" before the card is exposed.

B.   Play of card from Dummy.

Declarer plays a card from Dummy by naming the card, after which Dummy picks up the card and faces it on the Table.

C.   Compulsory Play of Card.

A Defender's card held so that it is possible for his Partner to see its face must be played to the current trick.

Declarer must play a card from his hand if it is;

       (1)   held face up, touching or nearly touching the table, or

       (2)   maintained in such a position as to indicate that it has been played.

A card in the Dummy must be played if it has been deliberately touched by Declarer, except for the purpose of arranging Dummy's cards.

A card must be played if a player names or otherwise designates it as the card he proposes to play.

Until his partner has played a card a player may change an unintended designation if he does so without pause for thought.

                          xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

       X)   Quiz Answers:

Club Members had three months to submit their solutions to the Quiz on "Doubling". The opportunity was available for multiple submissions. Eventually the solution would be determined on the basis of the Evaluation determined by Grahame Weir at the time of setting the Quiz.

The Answers and scoring points are as follows:

Q1)   2© = 6                     Pass = 10         1NT = 7           Double = 3       others = 0

Q2)   2§ = 6                      2© = 6             Double = 10     2¨ = 6             others = 0

Q3)   2© = 6                     Pass = 4           1NT = 10         Double = 1       others = 0

Q4)   3© (strong ) = 10      2© = 6             Double = 10     4© = 5

Q5)   pass = 9                    double = 6        2¨ = 10           3¨ = 3             others = 0

Q6)   1NT = 4                   2¨ = 7             3¨ = 10           2§ (forcing) = 10

Q7)   2ª = 10                   3/4ª = 8          2© = 7             1ª/© = 5

Q8)   pass = 8                    1NT = 10         2¨ = 2             2NT = 3

Q9)   1© = 6                     1ª = 10           2ª = 3             others = 0

Q10) 1NT = 5                   2§ = 2             1© = 2             pass = 10

Q11)  3© = 10                  4© = 9.5          2© = 5             pass = 0

In Q11) your extreme shape and length in Hearts + Spade void should make game or a sacrifice a good option, so you should jump in Hearts.

Well I hope you all scored 110 anything over 95 is very good.

This may shed some light on the take out double – the main thing to have is partnership understanding, good luck all. 

Grahame Weir

Well Fourth place went to Rowena Austin with 67 points. Third place went to Robin Lane with 79 points. Second place went to Hilary Lane with an impressive 94.5 points. The maximum number of points that were available was 110 points. Congratulations go to Mike Mulligan who scored an outstanding total of 109.5 points!! His total is only 0.5% short of PERFECT, and only Grahame Weir can explain the shortcoming (see above). Well done to Mike Mulligan, our Winner of the bottle of Champagne!! Thanks to all those who entered the Competition.