Culbertson3

This article first appeared in

vol. 9, nr. 4/5, July 1998.

Culbertson Dissected Part 3/4

by Jules van Ogtrop

-------

Who was Ely Culbertson? Did he deserve the idolising veneration our parents and grandparents had for him? These are the questions Jules van Ogtrop tries to answer in this four-part series about the famous American bridge player and bridge promotor. Van Ogtrop bases his account on the records of the 300-deal match played by Culbertson and his wife Josephine, and their respective partners Theodore Lightner and Michael Gottlieb, against a strong British team in 1933.

The picture to the left shows the dust cover of the Dutch translation of the 1935 Blue Book, reprinted in 1937, and containing a supplement representing the changes to the Culbertson system, as presented in the 1936 Gold Book.

The next deal, too, turned out poorly owing to the aversion against a 2NT-opening bid by the proponents of the Culbertson system.

W/neither	3 A J 9 7 5 2 J 7 3 7 6 4		WEST Morris Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass	NORTH Josephine Pass 2 3 5 Pass	EAST Tabbush Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass	SOUTH Gottlieb 1 3 4NT 5
Q J 8 6 2 3 Q 6 5 2 A 9 3		9 7 5 Q 10 8 4 10 9 4 J 5 2
-	A K 10 4 K 6 A K 8 K Q 10 8

The British at the other table had bid to 4

in papa-mama-style: 2NT-3

-3NT-4

. Apparently, the faithful Culbertson-follower was not allowed something like that, judging by the above Josephine-Gottlieb auction. The result was one down. True, the bad trump break was bad luck, but on the other hand, the auction had quite unnecessarily propelled to the five-level, and received its just desserts. As for the play, notice that even 4

becomes awkward if West holds up the ace of clubs once. I fear that neither Culbertson, nor Morris defended like that, but the account makes no mention of it.

Even more disastrous was the auction on the following deal.

E/NS	K J 9 4 A Q 5 A Q 10 6 2 3		WEST Morris - Pass Pass Double Double	NORTH Josephine - 2 4NT 6 Pass	EAST Tabbush Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass	SOUTH Gottlieb 1 3(!) 5 7 Pass
A 10 3 10 4 3 2 7 K Q 8 7 2		8 7 6 5 2 J 9 8 7 6 3 10 9
-	Q K K J 9 8 5 4 A J 6 5 4

Josephine had to jump shift in order to keep the auction going, thereby masking her enormous diamond fit for the time being. Why did Gottlieb not rebid 3

? That would suggest - as was frequently the case - that he held longer clubs than diamonds but with points mostly in diamonds. After 4NT, 5

wasn't a sign-off, as clubs hadn't been mentioned yet. That's where the confusion set in. With 6

, Josephine was trying to convey the message: "This is as far as we should go." I can well imagine Gottlieb's surprise. Only now did he learn that Josephine had good diamonds, too. Her 4NT showed either three aces, or two aces and a king. From her jump he deduced that it had to be three aces. He himself, holding this good hand, had promised very little as yet. Here goes, making world history with a daring 7

.
History he did make - in the history of disasters. Culbertson justifiably remarked that Josephine had taken charge, and that she, therefore, had to select the final contract.

How successful was Culbertson's own slam bidding? No great shakes, as we shall see. Slam were missed regularly, particularly if his partner was to be declarer. On the other hand, he was proud as a peacock with the following 6-contract which rolled home in a lucky manner.

E/EW	K Q 5 2 A Q 3 J 7 Q 10 6 2		WEST Culbertson - 2 3 6 Redouble	NORTH Beasley - Pass Pass Double Pass	EAST Lightner 1 2 4NT Pass Pass	SOUTH Domville Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass
- K J 6 5 2 K Q 8 5 3 K J 4		A J 10 9 4 10 A 6 4 2 A 9 8
-	8 7 6 3 9 8 7 4 10 9 7 5 3

A remarkable sequence. First, Culbertson bid a non-forcing 2

, but fortunately, Lightner found another call, after which there was no stopping the gentlemen. Culbertson greeted the lead of the

Q with scornful laughter. As if he would fall for that one! He won the

A, discarding a heart - which was wrong, as we shall see- and proceeded to run the

10 to Beasley's queen. The latter was friendly enough to return a club. The

K was covered and ruffed, after which it was plain sailing. What would have happened if Beasley had returned a trump, instead of a club? Culbertson could have pitched a club on the established

J, and would have to ruff another heart - with the

A, this time. All ends well because of the 2-2 diamond break. Worse still, if the diamonds break 3-1, he would have had the option of the club finesse. After all, for his double Beasley had shown up with a lot already, and it didn't have to include the

Q. Culbertson could have avoided all these complications had he pitched a club on the

A, and kept his fifth heart. That card could have been established fairly rik-free by ruffing in the early going.
Culbertson, in his analysis, didn't have a good word to spare for the British at the other table, whose auction died at 5

.
Beasley, too, was to receive a sneer. He should have believed The Master, and should never have doubled. But what would The Master have said had the

8 rather than the

8 shown up in dummy?

It soon became apparent how unjustified Culbertson's self-satisfaction was.

W/neither	10 3 J 10 7 6 4 3 J 5 3 K 6		WEST Culbertson 1(!) 1NT 3NT	NORTH Beasley Pass Pass Pass	EAST Lightner 1 3 Pass	SOUTH Domville Pass Pass Pass
Q A Q 9 Q 9 8 7 2 A Q 10 8		K 8 7 5 2 K A K 10 6 J 7 4
-	A J 9 6 4 8 5 2 4 9 5 3 2

3NT was made with three overtricks, but a 6

-contract would have been of better quality than the previous one. East's clubs are pitched on West's heart honors, and the

K would come down pretty quickly. Culbertson's own system didn't allow him to open with 1

, which contributed to his distribution remaining a mystery. Noteworthy, too, is that his 1NT-rebid was unlimited. Incidentally, the board turned out a wash, as the opposition had also reached 3NT. No Culbertson commentary was forthcoming.

Culbertson and his partner also failed to bid a cold slam on this board:

W/EW	J 9 3 Q 8 5 2 J 10 7 4 9 7		WEST Culbertson 1 Pass(!) 5	NORTH Beasley Pass Pass Pass	EAST Lightner 3 4 Pass	SOUTH Mathieson 3 Pass Pass
A K Q 8 4 4 3 K 8 J 6 5 3		10 6 6 A Q 6 2 A K 10 8 4 2
-	7 5 2 A K J 10 9 7 9 5 3 Q

After making an overtrick in 5

, Lightner, of course, reproached his partner for not raising his clubs rightaway. Culbertson used the contrived argument that he first wanted to learn more about the East hand, without raising the level of the auction; in other words, he wanted to find out whether perhaps Lightner's 3

-response was based on strong spade support. And furthermore, Lightner could now deduce from his failure to bid 3NT that he didn't have a heart stopper. This, of course, was utter nonsense. Instead, he gave the impression that he had a minimum, and would, perhaps, much rather defend. It was again obvious that Culbertson lost interest if he couldn't play a slam himself. The slam was missed at the other table as well, although Morris, West, did raise immediately.

Psychics did occur fairly frequently, but were seldom effective. Usually, they didn't lead to accidents because partner - particularly when not-vul against vul - took it into account. The following deal is typical.

E/NS	J 7 3 K 4 2 A K 9 8 A 9 7		-	WEST Culbertson - 1 Pass	NORTH Beasley - Pass Pass	EAST Lightner Pass 4	SOUTH Domville Pass Pass
A K Q 6 10 9 7 3 2 J 8 6 4		10 8 5 4 2 A J 8 6 3 J Q 2
-	9 Q 5 Q 10 7 6 5 4 K 10 5 3

went one down, and Culbertson reproached his partner for ignoring the possibility of a third hand semi-psych, white against red, which didn't argue in favor of the gentlemen's ethics. Remarkable, too, was Beasley's passivity, even though he, too, had a take-out double available. North-South can make 4

, and the 4

-call wasn't too bad, therefore.
Exactly the same thing happened at the other table. There, too, North (Josephine) wouldn't move an inch.

One time, when Culbertson went haywire, it really backfired:

E/neither	A 7 Q 4 3 A Q 7 5 4 Q 10 8		WEST Culbertson - 1 2NT(!) 4 Pass	NORTH Beasley - 1 Pass Pass Pass	EAST Lightner Pass 1 3NT Pass Pass	SOUTH Domville Pass 2 Double Double
10 8 6 4 2 10 K 6 2 A J 9 6		K J 5 3 J 9 7 5 10 9 K 7 2
-	Q 9 A K 8 6 2 J 8 3 8 4 3

Domville had a better idea of what was going on than Beasley, who dreamily kept on passing. The contract went three down, while at the other table Gottlieb was set in 3

, unnecessarily, had he only guessed the diamond layout better. Despite this debacle, the sly Culbertson still managed to promote himself. In his commentary he described his 2NT-bid as: "One of my atrocious bids that made me famous in the history of bridge."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------to be continued

To Part 4 To Part 1 To Part 2

To IMP Bridge Index