{I suggest you save this file and read it later.}
The game of Bridge was introduced to the western world in the late 19th century. I have not been able to discover its true origin. {have you?} Some have suggested it took its name from a bridge in Turkey over which people used to travel to play. The earliest book I have traced on the subject is "BRIDGE AND HOW TO PLAY IT" by Archibald Dunn, the 15th edition of which was published by Routledge in 1909. He had played a similar game in Smyrna, 30 years previously. Bridge was very different from its modern descendant.
For example, dealer was always declarer. There was no auction, nor contract. Dealer could name trumps before the opening lead or could cede the right to dummy. All the opposition could do before the opening lead was double. The dealer or dummy could then redouble. The opposition could then re-redouble, and so on until the value of a "one level" score was equal to or greater than 100 points. Game was 30 points with the trick scores going to which ever side won more than six tricks. The scale was 12, 8, 6, 4, 2 for No Trumps, Hearts, Diamonds, Clubs, and Spades, respectively for each trick won over six. There were extra points for slams and honours but these were "above the line". About the only similarity to the modern game was that Rubber went to the pair which won two out of three games.
It was impossible to score game, from a love score, in Spades or Clubs, even if a pair made a Grand Slam! Thus a typical love-all tactic, if neither dealer nor dummy held a good hand, would be to call Spades, to minimise the opposition's potential score. You can also imagine why the "Strong No Trump" developed, although it is interesting that even then some experts used the "gambling No Trump", with a long solid suit, hoping to run 9 tricks for game ([9 - 6] x 12 = 36 > 30)[footnote 1], before the defenders found their own best line.
According to Mr Dunn, Bridge developed independently of Whist. It is clearly of the same general family, in that one could argue that the principle behind the trick-taking nature of such card games is the simplest, yet most far reaching of any: the highest card wins; the rule of life? Mankind, being what it is, however, is always seeking new challenges. Bridge soon gave way to "Auction Bridge".
Its two main innovations were:
a. The pairs compete to be declarer by holding an auction. Beginning with the dealer, players bid a number of tricks (above six) with a particular suit as trumps (or No Trumps). The highest bidder wins the auction. A tie in the number of tricks bid is resolved by the new hierarchy of suits: No Trumps, Spades, Hearts, Diamonds, and Clubs.
b. Declarer, who is the member of the pair winning the auction to have named first the winning suit (or No Trumps), must then strive to make at least the number of tricks bid in the auction. If declarer fails, the opponents score points "above the line". If overtricks are made, however, they are scored by declarer's side "below the line" in full. So, if declarer won the auction at "2 Spades" (i.e. 8 tricks with Spades as trumps), but made 12 tricks, a Small Slam would be scored.
The scoring system was adjusted too. No Trumps, Spades, Hearts, Diamonds, & Clubs scored 10, 9, 8, 7, 6 points respectively for each trick more than six made by declarer. With 30 points still being "game", one sees where 3NT, 4 of a "major", and 5 of a "minor", originated.
In the late 1920s and early 1930s Auction Bridge in turn gave way to Contract Bridge. Its invention circa 1925 is attributed to Harold Vanderbilt. The change may have seemed minor, but it became increasingly significant. In Auction Bridge declarer does not have to decide the "real contract" until dummy is displayed. To expand on the example given above: declarer, having won the auction at 2 Spades, may realise that the combined hands are so strong that 12 tricks are a possibility, and may play accordingly. The defenders have no idea what declarer has decided. Eventually if only eleven tricks are made, by brilliant defence, or careless play, declarer will not be deemed to have "gone one down", but will score 5 Spades. He not only suffers no penalty for "failing" to make the slam, but scores game!
This situation created problems for the defenders. They never knew what was declarer's real goal, only the minimum. The penalties for declarer "going down" in the auction-winning contract, however, were severe. Bidding was generally conservative. Hands being Passed by all players was commonplace. This may have been the reason why "Goulash" was used in parlour bridge deals to liven the bidding [footnote 2].
By means of the simple change that declarer scored below the line only what had been bid, Contract Bridge revolutionised the concept of bidding in at least three ways:
a. Declarer has an announced goal;
b. Defenders, knowing what that is, have a goal too;
c. Conservatism is no longer profitable.
The bonuses for games and slams are so great, and the penalties for small defeats are so relatively small, that aggressive bidding is more rewarding in the long run. Some strong players consider that if they fail in about half of their game contracts, then they are bidding well!
Contract Bridge continues to be increasingly popular. This is largely because of the national ranking schemes introduced for the Club-level game and higher, for Duplicate Bridge. In Duplicate Bridge, players meet all or most of the hands (or boards) dealt. This eliminates much of the luck of the deal of Rubber Bridge. The ranking points earned over the years at competitions, local or national, give a reasonable approximation to relative skills.
For such schemes to be generally effective they require organising and administering. Hence Duplicate Bridge has local, national, and international governing bodies which legislate for the game as a whole. Although largely beneficial, having such a rigid structure has prevented any further significant evolution of the game for 60 years. Now the new millennium is upon us, I believe it is time to reappraise the laws of Contract Bridge. There have been gradual changes in procedures for play, such as making the opening lead face down, and some recent tinkering with doubled penalties to inhibit extreme sacrifice bidding. There has been nothing, however, to restore to Duplicate Bridge the precision which good Rubber Bridge requires.
In some important ways Duplicate Bridge has regressed to Auction Bridge. For example, if one wins the contract at Two Diamonds, but makes Three, the duplicate score is 110: 40 for the contract, 20 for the overtrick, and 50 for the part score [every hand starts at love all, but with pre-assigned vulnerabilities]. If the contract were Three Diamonds, just made, the score would be exactly the same. The defenders, as in Auction Bridge, do not have as precise a contract to try to defeat, as they would have at Rubber Bridge.
Another characteristic of Duplicate Bridge bidding is the tendency to play in No trumps, when a suit would provide a safer contract. This is because a contract such as one Trump plus one scores 120, but three of a minor suit only 110. At the game level too, three No Trumps plus one will score 10 points more than four of a major suit just made. These scores, to my mind, reintroduce an increased element of risk taking, and luck, into Duplicate Bridge, to its detriment for ordinary players.
A suggestion, that has not so far found favour with the Bridge ruling bodies, is to introduce into Duplicate Bridge something akin to "above the line" as in Rubber Bridge. The idea is simple: overtricks would score half trick-value. Thus, three Diamonds made, would still score 110, but two Diamonds plus one would score only 100. Similarly four of a major would score 620 (vulnerable), but three No Trumps plus one only 615. Such a scheme would also restore meaning to the final digit of Contract Bridge scores. At present they all end in zero.
While I am being radical, I have another suggestion. Let declarer be the person who has won the auction. He, or she, bid it. Let he, or she, make it!
IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS OR IDEAS FOR IMPROVING THE GAME I WOULD BE GRATEFUL FOR THEM. You can contact me:
1 The sign ">" means "greater than"; "<" would mean "less than".
2 To produce a Goulash deal, the Passed hands remain sorted into suits. The pack is reconstituted by placing the hands one on top of another face down. The pack is then cut, not shuffled, then dealt in packets of 3, 4, or 5 (according to local habit) to give each player 13 cards with a distinctly non-random distribution.