An acronym for the World Bridge Federation. The World Bridge Federation is active in many departments, providing services to Zonal Organizations, National Federations, Officials, Players, Specialists, Bridge Journalists, various Institutions, etc. The World Bridge Federation (WBF) was formed in August 1958 by delegates from Europe, USA and South America. In August 1977 it was incorporated under the laws of the State of New York as a non-profit organization. A new set of By-laws was adopted in September 1977. The WBF has shown strong and steady growth and its membership now comprises 103 National Contract Bridge Organizations (NBOs) with about 700,000 affiliated members who participate actively in competitive bridge events, locally, nationally and internationally. Most of the NBOs belong to one of the seven geographical zones, each of which has its own Zonal organization. Each National Contract Bridge Organization agrees to fulfil certain requirements, such as opening its ranks to all its citizens and residents and upholding a standard of ethics acceptable to the WBF. The World Bridge Federation has a Congress to which each NBO is entitled to send one delegate. The Congress meets every second year, at Team Olympiads and at World Championships. The WBF is administered by an Executive Council which is assisted by the various Committees and Consultants it appoints. Activities of the World Bridge Federation include:
to promote, foster and promulgate the game of Contract Bridge throughout the world;
to provide the central organization for coordinating necessary revisions to the Laws;
to conduct Championships on a worldwide basis;
to circulate its own official medium, World Bridge News, which keeps officials and press throughout the world informed of WBF activities;
to promote a Master Points scheme for recognizing achievement in World and Zonal contests, and to maintain the necessary central records.
World Bridge Federation and Doping Laws
WORLD BRIDGE FEDERATION
Paris, 10 September, 2002
At its Meeting held on Friday 30th August, the Executive Council of the World Bridge Federation resolved to disqualify one of the players in the McConnell Cup. The player was informed that she was not eligible to take her place on the podium, receive a medal nor be entitled to any Master Points.
The WBF wants to remind to those concerned that:
1) The WBF was recognised as an International Sports Federation by the International Olympic Committee in 1999 on condition that it adopts:
a) the Olympic Charter
b) the court of arbitration
c) the anti doping regulations
All of the above have been incorporated into the WBF Constitution and By-laws.
2) It is the absolute belief of the WBF that the anti doping regulations are:
a) to protect the players' health
b) to ensure the integrity of the competition and would have been enforced anyway even in the absence of IOC recognition.
3) That it is recognised that some substances can enhance concentration and stamina at bridge, as well as be also injurious to the person or persons using them.
4) That the regulations as they are published in the 2002 General Conditions of Contest are mandatory for everybody and that the refusal to take a drug test is consequently subject to penalties.
5) That the regulations as published by the IOC and referred to in the Conditions of Contest provide for any participant to inform the laboratories before the test if any medicine is taken under prescription which would be acceptable.
The WBF Executive Council has established procedures to comply with the Code, which include:
1. Several members from Olympiad teams (Open and Women) and from the University Teams will be required to give urine sample(s) to a qualified laboratory technician selected by the WBF for the purposes of testing for violation of the Anti-doping Code. The selection of the players will be made randomly and by lot by the WBF. The testing will be performed by a laboratory approved by the IOC. At the time the sample is taken, players should inform the WBF, in a sealed envelope, about any prescription or over-the- counter medication being taken.
2. The type of "dope" which will be included in the testing includes so-called "recreational" drugs such as cocaine, marijuana, hashish, as well as so-called performance-enhancing substances. Even caffeine over a specific concentration is prohibited. The WBF is informed that 8-12 cups of American coffee consumed over a 3-hour period can produce a positive result for caffeine. A complete list of the prohibited substances is available on the Internet at http://www.olympic.org.
3. Any violations revealed by the test results (which may not be received for several weeks) will be referred to a special committee appointed by the WBF President for resolution, which could include disqualification of the offending player or his/her entire team. Any appeal of the decision of the committee by any player subjected to discipline related to the anti-doping policy shall be to the IOC Court of Arbitration for Sport.
World Bridge Federation Committee of Honour
This Committee was formed in 1972 for the purpose of recognising the unselfish efforts of individuals in making a significant contribution to the enhancement and growth of bridge throughout the world. Nominations to the Committee must be made by a minimum of three members of the WBF Executive Council from three separate Zones. Election to the Committee requires an affirmative vote from three-quarters of the Executive Council members, the detailed requirements being set out in article 3.3 of the By-Laws. Nomination may only be made in even numbered years. The Committee of Honour may not exceed eleven living members.
World Bridge Federation
The WBF was founded in 1958 in Oslo, Norway, by delegates from Europe, the United States, and Australia. The main objectives of this organization is the promotion of the game, coordinating the revision of the Laws, organizing world championships, keeping and maintaining WBF masterpoint records, etc. The zones of the WBF are:
World Bridge Federation By-Laws
The articles governing the organization.
World Bridge Federation Champions
World Zonal Team Championships (Bermuda Bowl, Venice Cup, Seniors Cup): Held every odd-numbered year, it is contested in three series, by teams representing the eight WBF geographical zones . In the Open series, contestants have the Bermuda Bowl at stake, while the Women series play for the Venice Cup. The third series, reserved for Senior players, was added in 2001.
World Team Olympiad: Held every leap year, it is open to representative teams from all WBF member countries. There are three series: for Open (competing for the Vanderbilt Trophy), Women and Senior national teams.
World Championships: Held every even-numbered, non-leap year, they comprise a great variety of competitions including the Open & Women Knockout Teams (Rosenblum Cup and McConnell Trophy), the Open & Women Pairs, the Mixed Pairs, the Senior Teams & Pairs, etc.
World Transnational Open Team Championships: This competition was inaugurated in 1997, and takes place in odd-numbered years at the same site as the World Zonal Team Championship, starting after the latter's qualifying stage.
World Mixed Team Championships: This competition was launched in 1996 and is held in conjunction with the World Team Olympiad every leap year, starting after the latter's qualifying stage.
World Youth Team Championship: A zonal teams competition for players up to 26 years old held every two years (in odd-numbered years until 2005, in even-numbered years as from 2006).
World University Team Cup: Launched in 2002 as a biennial event, this competition is open to national University teams and is played under the auspices of FISU.
World Junior Pairs Championship: A competition for players up to 25 years old held every two years (in odd-numbered years until 2003, in even-numbered years as from 2006) in Europe.
World Schools Pairs Championship: A competition for players up to 20 years old held every two years in Europe.
International Olympic Committee Grand Prix: A series of competitions among top invited teams that took place in the Olympic Museum in Lausanne (1998-2000) and at the site of the 2002 Winter Olympics, in support of bridge's effort to gain entry in the Olympic Games.
World Masters Individual: A top invitational competition played every two years as from 1992 in two series, open and women. A third series, for Junior players, was added in 2000 - the last time the event was held.
World Junior Individual Championship: Introduced in 2004 as a biennial event to take place in North America immediately prior to the World Junior Camp, this tournament is open to all Juniors and constitutes a prime social competition for young people.
World Simultaneous Pairs Championship: An unique annual competition played simultaneously in clubs all over the world. Players do not have to leave their homes, but they all compete in a world event scored over the field.
World Bridge Federation Code of Laws for Electronic or Online Bridge 2001
The WBF has published a Code of Laws for online bridge games and bridge events. Anyone participating in such events should be aware that there are a Code of Laws. This is a .pdf file format, and the WBF Code of Laws for Electronic Bridge 2001 will, depending on your browser, be automatically downloaded to your computer and opened with Adobe Acrobat Reader or automatically opened by your browser.
World Bridge Federation Constitution
The name of the organization shall be the World Bridge Federation, herein also called the WBF. It shall be a non-profit organization incorporated as Association in the meaning of article 60 and following of the Swiss Civil Code; its resources are constituted by members' annual dues or changes, gifts and donations and any other resource, such as income from competitions, tournaments and other events organized by the WBF; its resources shall be applied exclusively in furtherance of its beneficent purposes; and no part of its resources or earnings shall inure to the benefit of any private person.
World Bridge Federation Conversion Table - WBF Conversion Scale
A conversion table used by the WBF to convert International Match Points to Victory Points.
World Bridge Federation Executive Council
An explanation about the council, the present governing body, and the past presidents of the WBF.
World Bridge Federation Geographical Zones
The World Bridge Federation consists of seven Zonal Organizations. Each Zonal Organization administers bridge in its own geographical area, coordinating the National Federations of its member countries.
Zones Listed by the World Bridge Federation
World Bridge Federation General Conditions of Contest - 2003 .pdf file format
World Bridge Federation General Conditions of Contest - 2004 .pdf file format
World Bridge Federation Placing Points
These are points, in contrast to WBF Masterpoints, awarded by the World Bridge Federation to winners and very high finishers in WBF tournaments and Zonal team championships. A certain number of placing points are required to achieve the WBF rankings of Grand Master and World Life Master.
World Bridge Federation Player Rankings
The ranking of players according to the world masterpoint plan of the World Bridge Federation. There are presently three ranks and are in descending order: World Grand Master, World Life Master and World Master. The rank of World Grand Master is accomplished by accumulating 10 or more WBF Placing Points and winning at least one World Champion title. The rank of World Life Master is accomplished by winning 5 or more Placing Points and these rankings are for the life of the player. A player who wins 150 WBF masterpoints becomes a World Master, but may lose this rank if the total falls below 150 as a result of the annual percentage cut of 15%.
World Bridge Federation Systems Policy 1995
The policy of the WBF regarding the use of unusual Systems.
World Bridge Federation Systems Policy 2000
The policy of the WBF regarding the use of Partnership Agreements and Systems.
World Bridge Federation Systems Policy 2002
The policy of the WBF regarding the use of Partnership Agreements and Systems.
World Bridge Federation Teaching Program - An Internet Guide for Teachers including Tutorials, Practical Advice on setting up a Bridge School, Required Teaching Methods, Teaching Materials and all other necessary information to keep the student motivated. Also available in French.
World Bridge Federation Trophy
This trophy is awarded at the World Women's Pairs Championship and was first awarded in Cannes, France, in 1962.
World Bridge Federation Online Bridge Master - WOBM
This is a designation given by the WBF for those bridge players, who accumulate the most points during a calendar year while playing the game of bridge online. In the year 2003, a player using the handle "zippone" took first place with 1891 points in 2003 and became a WBF Online Bridge Master. The event is planned to be held annually.
World Bridge Federation Womens Bridge Club Online
An announcement published in the Daily Bulletin for the 49th European Bridge Team Championships for Monday, 23 June 2008, Issue No. 9, states the following intention to form a WBF Womens Bridge Club Online. The announcement is excerpted here:
Following the great success of the WBF/BBO Online Bridge Festival held earlier this year, we have decided not only to repeat the Festival in April 2009, but also to create a Women’s Online Bridge Club. The purpose of the Club will be to have a special website where women can discover information about Women’s Bridge - both on line and in clubs, tournaments, festivals and Championships.
It is planned to hold a day each week of online tournaments just for women where they can play in a relaxed and social atmosphere, with just that exciting edge of competition! There will be two individual and two pairs events on that day to try and ensure that players from all over the world will have a competition within their time-zone that they can enjoy.
It will also mean that pairs who live apart can train online by participating in these events, and in addition perhaps create new partnerships and friendships. The Club is intended to be informal and relaxed, with information and perhaps discussions that would not be possible on the more constrained websites. As it develops maybe we will have articles from women players about the game, as well as general information about Women’s Bridge.
Anna Maria Torlontano
Chairman, WBF and EBL Women’s Committees
This is an acronym to describe a certain situation when holding a distribution, which cannot be communicated to partner by any conventional method, however obscure. For example, if a bridge player picks up a holding with fewer than opening points and a distribution of 0-0-7-6, then the bridge player should compete, but the bridge player has no prior knowledge as to how to communicate this distribution to partner. Therefore, the best approach is the WAG approach, or Wild Ass Guess approach. This origin of this designation is purely colloquial.
Wagner Two Diamonds
The origin of this conventional method is unknown. The concept is that one player opens 2 Diamonds, indicating either a Weak Two Bid in Hearts or Spades. The idea is to obstruct the opponents as much as possible and have them conceiveably play in an incorrect final contract.
In order to obtain more information about the holding of one’s partner, who has opened the auction, and with no other informative bid readily available, the partner will generally temporize with a waiting bid. This is usually done after partner has opened 1 Club. If the partnership agreement is that any response by partner is forcing, then the temporizing waiting bid is also forcing, and the opener must describe his holding further. There are risks, however, in playing waiting bids after one’s partner has opened the auction in Third Seat.
Waive A Penalty
1. when playing rubber bridge, any member of the opposing side may condone an irregularity and waive any prescribed penalty, without consulting even his partner on the matter. When this occurs, then the right to enforce any penalty is lost and forfeited.
2. when playing duplicate and an irregularity occurs, then no player has the right to waive a penalty. The director must be called to the table to rule on the irregularity. The director may or may not allow the table’s unanimous consent to waive the penalty under the reassertion by the director that any possible penalties may be forfeited as a consequence. See Laws 10 and 11.
LAW 10 - ASSESSMENT OF A PENALTY
A. Right to Assess Penalty
The Director alone has the right to assess penalties when applicable. Players do not have the right to assess (or waive) penalties on their own initiative.
B. Cancellation of Payment or Waiver of Penalty
The Director may allow or cancel any payment or waiver of penalties made by the players without his instructions.
C. Choice after Irregularity
1. Explanation of Options
When these Laws provide an option after an irregularity, the Director shall explain all the options available.
2. Choice among Options
If a player has an option after an irregularity, he must make his selection without consulting partner.
LAW 11 - FORFEITURE OF THE RIGHT TO PENALISE
A. Action by Non-Offending Side
The right to penalise an irregularity may be forfeited if either member of the non-offending side takes any action before summoning the Director. The Director so rules when the non-offending side may have gained through subsequent action taken by an opponent in ignorance of the penalty.
B. Irregularity Called by Spectator
1. Spectator Responsibility of Non-Offending Side
The right to penalise an irregularity may be forfeited if attention is first drawn to the irregularity by a spectator for whose presence at the table the non-offending side is responsible.
2. Spectator Responsibility of Offending Side
The right to correct an irregularity may be forfeited if attention is first drawn to the irregularity by a spectator for whose presence at the table the offending side is responsible.
C. Penalty after Forfeiture of the Right to Penalise
Even after the right to penalise has been forfeited under this law, the Director may assess a procedural penalty (see Law 90).
See: Welsh Bridge Union.
A slang term to describe a bidding sequence, whereby bids are gradually or incrementally bid as opposed to all at once of with a jump.
Walking the Dog
This is a colloquial expression and is a bridge term meaning to bid a freak hand at a low level instead of preempting, so that when the bridge player in rotation does bid it at the higher levels, it is more likely that the opponents will double said bridge player and, as a result, provide the Dog Walker with a higher score when the bridge player actually makes the doubled contract.
Note: This expression may be geographically limited in the game of sports in general, as also in the game of bridge. The expression itself has several sexual connotations among other definitions in context and reference. Since all games are more or less competitive in nature such expressions can be employed to refer to certain actions at the bridge table to point out that said action has been intentionally detrimental and destructive so as to be injurious to the opponents. Compare: wanking the monkey and similar borderline-vulgar expressions.
Wall of Fame
Dr. Mark Lombard began 1999 the idea of a Wall of Fame as a complement to and expansion of the Hall of Fame maintained by the ACBL. The Bridge Club of Center City in Philadelphia is the home of the Wall of Fame, which contains voluntary contributed features and articles about the more popular and well-known bridge players as well as several bridge players, who are not as well known.
In 1932 at the World Bridge Olympics, a new form of duplicate bridge boards were introduced. They were made of plastic and were folded twice to form a square, which made them look like a gentleman’s wallet, and thus the name. They became popular because any player could simply put it into his pocket and carry it with him.
This defense method against a No Trump opening by the opponents was devised by Mr. Peter James Wallis of Brisbane, Australia. The guidelines are outlined below. The overcalls generally promise either a two-suited holding or the overcall is natural.
Wallis Modified or Modified Wallis Against No Trump
The features behind the concept of this variation are employed after a No Trump opening by an opponent. Whether or not the concept can / should be employed in the immediate seat or as a balancing action is dependent on the partnership agreement.
The Walpurgis Diamond is a conventional structure of opening bids, which inform partner about a certain point count range and about a certain distribution. The developer of this style, these opening bids is Mr. Paul Hackett with the possible assistance of Mr. John Collings. They were developed to supplement the Walpurgis Club system developed during the late 1970s.
This is a method devised and developed by Mr. Richard Walsh to describe the appropriate responses by the responder, who is seeking slam after partner has opened the auction with 1 No Trump.
Walsh Transfers - Walsh Transfer Bids
The concept of Walsh Trasfers has been expanded to include additional features by Mr. Micha Keijzers - website. The reasoning is that the method is effective in discovering a 5-3 or 4-4 fit in either Major suit following a preparatory 1 Club opening bid. This information has only been preserved and archived on this site in .pdf file format for future reference.
This is a bidding system, which is also referred to as Western Roth-Stone or West Coast Scientific, and which was generally advocated by Mr. Richard Walsh. The main elements of the bidding system:
1. Strong 1 No Trump openings 2. Non-forcing Stayman 3. Jacoby Transfers 4. Five-card Major openings with a forcing 1 No Trump Response 5. Swiss Major Suit Raises 6. Inverted Minors 7. Game-forcing Two-Over-One Responses 8. Mathe Asking Bids 9. Competitive Doubles 10. Negative Doubles 11. Responsive Doubles 12. New Minor Forcing 13. Wang Trump Asking Bids
This is a colloquial term for those bridge players constituting a bridge partnership, who complete as quickly as possible the two or three board round in order to wander around the playing area. This action may, more or less, be for purposes of distracting and possibly even disconcerting other players in the vicinity. The action does not need to be based on any personal intent of breaking the concentration of other players, who continue to play the round, but rather may even be owing to a physical necessity such as being over-active or suffering from a thyroid or adrenal gland dysfunction.
Wang Trump Asking Bids
Although not a slam-bidding technique or method this conventional method allows the partnership, generally without competition, to explore for the possibility of seeking a slam at a low level. Once it has been determined that a slam is possible, then the partnership initiates the slam-bidding agreement.
A right or a privilege of all bridge players during the play if a player has the feeling that his partner is about to commit an irregularity. For example:
No Spades, partner?
It is not your lead partner.
The lead is in the dummy, partner.
However, during the auction, it is not allowed that one partner warn his partner about a convention which either you or the opponents may be using, or to review the auction simply to wake up your partner regarding a previous bid which one partner believes has been misunderstood or not digested by his partner. These warnings have been given much debate and such warnings were barred by the 1987 Duplicate Code. However, zonal governing bodies were later granted the authority to permit such questions and/or remarks. Please check with the Zonal Bridge Organization for their guidelines. When such rules are in effect during tournaments, such warning questions and/or remarks are considered to be illegal and create an automatic revoke penalty if partner has a card of the suit.
There are certain situations in ACBL-play where a partner, who feels that the partner is about to commit an irregularity during the play, has the right to warn partner prior to an action. This warning may include any time a partner fails to follow suit and/or whenever it might appear that the declarer may be on the verge of leading from the wrong hand.
War Orphans Scholarships, Inc.
This was an educational foundation incorporated 1943 in New York State by officials and governors of ACBL. In the eight years of its existence it awarded about $800,000 in scholarship benefits to sons and daughters of members of the US armed services, who in World War II suffered service-connected of battle-connected deaths. Tournament winners 1943-1946 accepted printed certificates instead of prizes, the cost of trophies going to the scholarship fund, and special tournaments plus individual contributions and income from general solicitations made up the remainder of the fund. The board of the War Orphans Scholarships, Inc. was composed of official representatives of the armed services of the US and officers of the ACBL. These representatives are listed below:
General Peter C. Harris, former Adjutant General, Chairman American Legion Scholarship Committee, Chairman
General Frank T. Hines, Veterans Security Administrator, President
W.E. McKenny, Executive Secretary ACBL, Vice President
A.H. Morehead, President ACBL, Secretary and Treasurer
Watson B. Miller, Federal Security Administrator, former Executive Secretary American Legion
General James A. Ulio, Adjutant General USA
Admiral Randall Jacobs, Chief of Naval Personnel
Admiral Raymond Chalker, Commandant US Coast Guard
General G. Peck, Commandant US Marine Corps
The origin of this conventional method is unknown. It is also known under the designation of the San Francisco Convention. The conventional method is also known under the designation California Blackwood. It is a variation of the concept known and designated as the Norman convention. This variation allows the partnership to more accurately identify the honors after the trump suit has been established in a slam attempt.
Wash or Washout
Slang: in team-of-four play, a deal with no net score, and therefore a push.
This is a designation for the Summary Sheet on which the results of each rubber are credited to the winner and debited against the losers, in rubber bridge and Chicago. The results are entered in hundreds of points, with 50 points ignored in England but counted as 100 in the United States. This designation can also be referred to as: 1. flogger in England, or 2. Back Score, or 3. and also ledger, among other designations.
Washington, George - (1732 - 1799)
First President of the newly formed United States from April 30, 1789 for two terms until 1797, and died less than three years later on December 14, 1799. He was also a Whist player. An excerpt from The World's Greatest Books, Vol X, by Various follows:
Washington returned to Mount Vernon on Christmas Eve, 1783, and busied himself with the care of his estates. He had never ceased to be the agriculturist; through all his campaigns he had kept himself informed of the course of rural affairs at Mount Vernon. By means of maps on which every field was laid down and numbered, he was enabled to give directions for their several cultivation, and to receive accounts of their several crops. No hurry of affairs prevented a correspondence with his agent, and he exacted weekly reports. He now read much on agriculture and gardening, and corresponded with the celebrated Arthur Young, from whom he obtained seeds of all kinds, improved ploughs, plans for laying out farmyards, and advice on various parts of rural economy.
His active day at Mount Vernon began some time before dawn. Much of his correspondence was despatched before breakfast, which took place at half-past seven. After breakfast he mounted his horse and rode off to various parts of his estate; dined at half-past two; if there was no company he would write until dark; and in the evening he read, or amused himself with a game of whist.
The adoption of the Federal Constitution opened another epoch in the life of Washington.
Other biographies have been included in the following .pdf file for the interest of the Whist student.
The Watson Trophy is a tournament conducted under the supervision of the Scottish Bridge Union by the East District Congress. The tournament is conducted as an Open Multiple Teams of Four championship. The event is generally, and for all purposes the traditional opening tournament for the season. This is an open event, and a Match Point certificate must be obtained from the SBU's Master Point Secretary every year before the event.The Watson Troply is presented by Mr. and Mrs. Jack Watson.
The Way Forward Bidding System
This bidding system was developed by Mr. Ed Sheldon, Mr. Alistair Flutter and Mr. Jon Cooke and is in the form of a complete compilation of guidelines as to its employment. The Way Forward, in the words of the authors, is built around the 1 Spade opener, designed as a low-level pre-empt. The authors were introduced to this idea by a system called The Science, a natural system in which, with a minimum hand, a four card Major is opened whenever possible. The problem with The Science method is that the stronger hands which are opened 1 Major cause difficulties. These notations and summary, dated 23/6/1996, are only archived on this site in .pdf file format for future reference.
1. to be lacking strength;
2. a preemptive bid is assumed to be weak.
Weak Jump Overcall
This method was begun by the famous Four Aces during the Thirties and Mr. Oswald Jacoby is credited with its inception. It has become part of the Roth-Stone system and incorporated throughout bridge history into other bidding systems. The weak jump overcall in a suit is completely preemptive in nature, and would show generally 6-12 points and at least a 6-card suit length. The main concern of the partner employing the weak jump overcall is the vulnerability factor.
Weak Jump Shift or Weak Jump Shift Responses
A feature of the Roth-Stone system, which uses a response, after partner opens the auction, of the jump shift to be understood as weak and preemptive in nature. The holding of the partner could be as low as 6 high card points of even less with values in the preemptive suit, but his length in the suit called must be at least six. The advantage to a Weak Jump Shift response is that the player can describe his hand and holding with one simple bid while, at the same time, consuming a level of bidding space. As a result, the opponents may be less likely to find a fit at such a high level and have the opportunity to exchange the necessary information. Although this is the case, the opponents do have defensive mechanisms available to counteract a Weak Jump Shift response.
Weak No Trump
The range for a No Trump opening has been questioned by many bridge players. A strong No Trump opening has been determined to be between 16 and 18 high card points. Any range below 16 high card points may be considered to be weak in nature. The No Trump range is normally defined within 3 high card points. Many players use the range 15 to 17 high card points, whereas other players use a range from 13 to 15 high card points. Many tournament players employ the range from 10 to 12 high card points up to and including Third Seat when not vulnerable, and a higher range when vulnerable.
Weak No Trump Overcall
Employing the weak No Trump overcall, the overcaller is informing his partner that he holds the equivalent of a weak No Trump opening, according to the partnership agreement regarding range, position during the auction, and the condition of vulnerability. This allows a defender to enter the auction more frequently then were the No Trump confined to a certain, higher range. This action, however, is sometimes confined only to the state of favorable vulnerability by some partnerships.
Weak Opening Systems
Lukasz Slawinski of Poland based his investigation of weak opening systems on the structure of the Strong Club System. The original concept is that if a player passes with a moderate to good holding, then the partner should open with zero points. This was commonly referred to as Fert, a reference to the word fertilizer. The range of the partner could be between zero and 7 points. With 8 to 12 points, another set of bidding sequences governed the bidding process. With 13 or more points, the partner is required to pass. Since the bidding process depends very much on the various bidding sequences regarding the point count, the position of the dealer, the condition of vulnerability, etc., the systems employed become complex, which has lead to several modifications and variations of the weak opening systems, among which are Regres, No Name, and Delta.
The Weak 6-4 Method
This concept was devised as an augmentation to the New Minor Forcing conventional method. The foundation of the concept is, as a responder, the ability to show a particularly distributional holding of 6-4 and generally weak values.
In general, a suit which the opponents will most likely lead against a suit contract in the hope of establishing one trick or more through length, but which holds no expected values. The designation may also refer to an unstopped suit, but if a No Trump contract is being considered after finding no suit fit, the term could also apply to a suit in which the opponents hold nine or more cards and in which only one stopper is held.
Weak Suit Game Try
This designation is also referred to as Help Suit Game Try. After one player has opened the bidding in a Major suit and his partner has raised his suit to the Two Level, the opener will attempt game by bidding his weakest suit to try for game. If the partner has no help in the rebid suit of the opener, he should sign off in the agreed suit on the Three Level. If the partner has good support, then he should attempt game.
In the United States, this term is the equivalent of a drop-dead bid. It is the English term for a natural unconstructive suit response by the partner of a 1 No Trump bidder.
Weak Two Bids
A method used mostly in combination with Two Clubs Strong Artificial Openings. All suits opened on the two level besides Clubs are weak two-bids and have a normal range from 5 to 11 high card points and at least a 6-card suit. The position at the table and the condition of vulnerability are two factors which must be considered. The concept was applied during the age of Auction Bridge, and then developed further by Mr. Charles Van Vleck of New York. Refinements of the weak two-bids were done in later years by Mr. Howard Schenken based upon the Vanderbilt Club System, and the concept was eventually incorporated into most of the modern bidding systems.
Defense Against Weak Two Bids - There are many forms of defense methods against any and all conventional methods. It would be impossible to introduce them all since they are normally based on a partnership agreement and/or understanding. We do wish to present several defense mechanisms whenever possible and whenever we find them.
Any response by the partner of the opener which signals that the bidding should be discontinued at that level.
Weak-Strong 1 Club Opening
In the attempt to devise bidding systems, which more definitely clarify the description of two holdings of two partners, Strong 1 Club openings were developed in an attempt to reach the optimum contract in the correct denomination and on the correct level. There are many such systems available to the bridge player. The debate, however, has uncovered a weakness of such Strong 1 Club openings in that any interfering overcall, however weak, decreases the accuracy of the following bidding sequence, since the overcall must somehow be dealt with. Even in the instance that the weak overcall is justified, many opponents may simply psych in order to disturb the line of communication and exchange of information. The concept of a Weak-Strong 1 Club system is to diminish the nature and effectiveness of such destructive and psychic overcalls by the defenders and allow the partnership to reach the optimum contract. The reason is that by allowing the introduction of an overcall, of whatever nature, the partnership can continue to exchange accurate information. This innovative creation included two different interpretations of the 1 Club opening: 1. either weak, or 2. strong. Some of these Weak-Strong 1 Club openings are: Beta and Carrot Club
A tournament movement developed 1977 by the National Tournament Director John Harris, which took into account the distribution of the boards, the movement of the boards and players, the seeded tables, and the seating assignments. The following is an excerpt pertaining to the reasons for the Web Movement:
It is not uncommon to have, at least in small tournaments, sessions of from 16 to 22 tables in which a movement of reasonable technical adequacy is required, such as in a Master Pairs or an Open Pairs final. In the past the standard procedure has been to use twinned 3/4 movements and combined match-pointing.
These movements are universally disliked by players and are not too popular with directors. They do have the purported advantage provided by rotating comparisons, but this is the subject of some disagreement. In all other respects the Web Movements are, in my opinion, superior.
In effect, these movements consist of two subsections in which the boards circulate independently, while the moving pairs progress to the other subsection after playing at the highest numbered table in one. In all cases, the traveling pairs move each round to the next higher numbered table, boards move next lower within each subsection. The 18-table game will be described in detail. The others will be understood by simply glancing at the Master sheet and remembering what happened in the 18-table progression. Master Sheets are available on request from ACBL Tournament Division.
Basic Distribution of Boards. Tables 1-9 play one set ("A"), tables 10-18 another ("B"). Stationary pairs at 1-9 play the boards in ascending sequence, those at 10-18 in descending. Boards 1-2 start at Table1, 3-4 at 2, etc. up to 17-18 at 9. The board order is inverted and displaced in the other subsection; 25-26 start at Table 18, 1-2 at 17, 3-4 at 16, etc. to 15-16 at 10. Note that on round one, Boards 1-16 may be duplicated in the two subsections, 17-18 and 25-26 may either be duplicated at tables 9 and 18 respectively, or pre-duplicated (preferred). Boards 19-24 must be duplicated by the staff.
Movement of Boards and Players. Traveling pairs always move to the next higher numbered table. There is no skip. "A" boards move down until they reach Table 1 at which point they go to a bye-stand to re-enter at Table 9. "B" boards move down until they reach Table 10 at which point they go to the other bye-stand to re-enter at Table 18.
Seeded Tables. Assuming that Table 1 is to be seeded, the only suitable tables are:
Sixteen tables - 1,5,9.13.
Eighteen tables - 1,7,13
Twenty tables - 1,9
Twenty-two tables - 1,12
Seating Assignments. In Open Pairs finals, two qualifying sections, the A qualifiers are simply made N-S, the B's E-W. For three qualifying sections, a schedule accompanies each Master sheet for assigning pair numbers. It is assumed that the use of these progressions will never occur where there are more than three qualifying sections.
This award was donated and endowed by Mr. C.C. Wei and after his death continued by Kathie Wei-Sender. The award was originally for the best newspaper or published article regarding the game of bridge, but later changed to be awarded for the best defensive play of the year.
This is a method of defense, which is a partnership understanding, generally against a preempt on the three level, and which combines the application of the Cheaper Minor Suit for takeout, and the double is applied as an optional double.'
The Weissberger method is a conventional variation of the Stayman convention. The concept behind this variation evolved within the Acol bidding system and was devised by Mr. Alan Truscott, Mr. John Pressburger and Mr. Maurice Weissberger, after whom the conventional variation was named.
Welsh Bridge Union
The Welsh Bridge Union is responsible for the structure of organized bridge in Wales. For administrative purposes, the WBU is split into four geographical areas: the East, the Mid, the North and the West. There are no full-time officers of the Union and most of the work is done by elected officials for a token honorarium. The President is elected for a period of one year and this honor rotates around the areas in sequence.
The concept of the Wenble conventional competitive method was developed by Mr. Michael (Mike) Wenble and licensed by the English Bridge Union in the mid-1970s. Following a 1 Club or 1 Diamond opening bid by the opposing side the intervenor is able to enter the auction when holding certain combinations, which indicate strongly that any competitive bid may result in a positive score or at least a more favorable score.
A form of defense signaling used in Australia and New Zealand, and perhaps elsewhere. After the lead is faced and it is discovered that the dummy has a singleton in that suit of the card led, then playing an odd card is encouraging and playing an even card show suit preference. Against slam contracts, the play of a Jack demands a suit switch. Against No Trump contracts, the guideline is not to give count from an honor doubleton. Against suit contracts, the guideline is not to give count from an honor doubleton, unless the doubleton is Jx and/or 10x and the defense is seeking a ruff.
This trophy was donated by Sir Derrick Wernher in 1934 and was contested at the Summer Nationals until 1962. It was conceived for the National Men's Pairs Championship. It is presently contested at the Spring NABCs.
The player who sits at the left of South. South is to his right and North is to his left.
West Coast Conventional Method
See: Two Hearts Negative Response
West Coast Scientific
See: Walsh System
This is a trophy donated in the memory of Mr. Frank T. Westcott by his wife in 1974 and which is awarded to the winner of the Olympiad Fund Pairs at the Summer Nationals. Mr. Frank T. Westcott was also the President of the ACBL from 1960 to 1961.
Western Bridge Association
This association was a Chicago-based membership organization which published The Contract Bridge Magazine in the years 1933 and 1934 and edited by Mr. E.M. Lagron.
Formally the Pacific Bridge League, which was founded by Mr. Tom Stoddard. In 1948 the organization became known as the Western Division and as the Western Conference in 1956 after it merged with the ACBL. The current members are:
District 17 - (District 17 Home Page)
District 20 - (District 20 Home Page)
District 21 - (District 21 Home Page)
District 22 - (District 22 Home Page).
See: Walsh System
Also referred to as West Coast Scientific, Western Roth-Stone, and Walsh. It was devised by Mr. Richard Walsh in the early Sixties.
See: California Cuebid. In essence, this is a cuebid of a suit which has been bid by an opponent, which asks for stoppers in the suit of the opponent, as opposed to showing stoppers in the suit of the opponent, for a possible final contract in No Trump. See: Eastern Cuebid, which is a the reverse concept and shows stoppers in the suit of the opponent.
This trophy was awarded for distinguished services to the game of bridge. It was presented in memory of Mr. Edwin A. Wetzlar in 1935, and after 1940 the trophy is presented to ACBL Honorary Members.
Year Winner 1935: H. Hubert Boscowitz 1936: Waldemar von Zedtwitz 1937: Gordon Gibbs 1938: Alfred Gruenther 1939: Nate B. Spingold 1940: Harold S. Vanderbilt
Slang: to double, generally for penalties.
A term to describe four consecutive hands in Chicago.
Whimsical Club Opening Bids
These opening bids were devised and developed by Mr. Steve Starkey of Pecs, Hungary, and are based on the principles of the Precision bidding system.
This concept was developed by Mr. Geoffrey S. Jade Barrett in preparation for the 1997 Junior World Teams conducted in the city of Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. This information was provided by Mr. Geoffrey S. Jade Barrett.
Whisk This is an alternate designation for the game of Whist. According to the historian Dr. Samuel Johnson it was an English lower-class designation and was employed until approximately the end of the eighteenth century.
Whist - Whisk - The Game of Whist
The game of cards had its origins in England, which evolved from earlier card games such as Triumph, Trump, Ruff and Honors, and Swabbers. The game is actually one of the predecessors to the game of bridge, the accepted lineage being: Whist - Contract Bridge - Auction Bridge - Bridge. It is played much like contract bridge, but there is no tabled dummy. Each trick that is won over book scores one point for that partnership winning the trick, so the possible range for any partnership is from one to seven. Rubber bonuses and honor bonuses also count in the scoring.
A description of the game of Whist, penciled and inked by the innovators, the orginators, the developers, and compiled somewhat chronologically can be read by the earnest student by using the Internet to search and research. One description, short and detailed, can be found at the Online Encyclopedia, and which information has only be archived and preserved in .pdf file format on this site for future reference.Whisht: one of our visitors kindly pointed out that a similar-sounding word, spelled as whisht, is employed to interjectionally to enjoin silence or to urge silence. The word can be employed either as a noun, an intransitive verb, or as an interjection. The etymology is Middle English and dates back to the 14th century. The word itself continues to be used in certain locations in Scotland and Ireland.
There are several variations on the game of Whist and some are included below:
Bid Whist: A partnership game with bidding, played mainly in the United States.
Color Whist or Kleurwiezen: A game similar to Solo Whist, played mainly in Belgium.
German Whist: A two-player adaptation of Whist without bidding, played mainly in the United Kingdom.
Israeli Whist: A game in which a player tries to bid the exact number of tricks one will take.
Knockout Whist: A game in which a player who wins no trick is eliminated.
Minnesota Whist: A game in which there are no trumps, and hands can be played to win tricks or to lose tricks and is a very similar game of Norwegian Whist.
Romanian Whist: A game in which players try to predict the exact number of tricks they will take.
Solo Whist: A game played in England, where individuals can bid to win 5, 9 or 13 tricks or to lose every trick.
This was formerly a club of men interested in the game of Whist and later in all successive forms of bridge. The Whist Club was established in New York around 1893 and most all of its members were influential, wealthy men of society such as Mr. Harold S. Vanderbilt, Mr. J.B. Elwell, Mr. Milton Work, Mr. Ely Culbertson, and represented the unquestioned authority in the forming of the bridge laws for the United States for more than forty years. Two earlier codes of contract bridge laws were voluntarily withdrawn when the Whist Club, in 1927, produced a code for contract bridge, established by a committee consisting of Mr. Harold S. Vanderbilt, Mr. H.C. Richard, Mr. Charles Cadley, Mr. Raymond Little and Mr. William Talcott. The committee of the Whist Club later collaborated with the Portland Club of London, England and the French Bridge Federation to produce and establish the first (1932) and second (1935) international codes. Representatives of the Whist Club also served continuously on the National Laws Commission for the laws of 1943, 1948, 1949 and 1963.
Whist, History of
The early history of whist is involved in obscurity. All games of high character become perfected by degrees; and Whist, following this rule, has been formed by gradual development. As early as the beginning of the sixteenth century, a card game called triumph, or trump was commonly played both in England and on the continent. This game in its chief features, viz., the predominance of one particular suit, and in its general construction, was so similar to Whist, that it may be assumed to have been the game from which Whist afterwards developed.
This excellent summary provided via the web link is for all bridge history buffs and provides excellent presentation and the researched material is noted meticulously. We have only preserved and archived this information in .pdf file format on this site for future reference.
Whist, Rules of - Year of 1883
This is a .pdf file, which contains the Rules of the Game of Whist as valid in the year 1883. This information was discovered in the American Cyclopeadia: A Popular Dictionary of General Knowledge, Volue XVL, published in London, England, in the year of 1883.
Whist School, Little - Little Whist School - pdf file
During the promotion and advancement for the game of Whist, not only in the United Kingdom but also in the United States, several events occurred, which changed the future of the game for all time. One of these evolutionary steps was triggered by the younger players, who became interested in the game, often owing to the fact that their future employers were also avid and enthusiastic players. The following link is to a .pdf file, which contains an excerpt from the publication Whist: American Leads And Their History, authored by Mr. Nicohoas Browse Trist, and published by Harper & Brothers Publishers located in New York, New York, United States, in the year 1900.
Slang: to be non-vulnerable.
This is a designation, perhaps colloquial in nature, from the game of Whist, which means that the player in rotation leads from a singleton, in order to be able to trump later, and action known as whitechapelling. This 'lead' can be the first card played to the game or a card later played from another suit. The origin of the term in unknown, but it is also the name of a district of East London, part of Greater London borough of Tower Hamlets. The term, however, is also employed in the sport of cricket.
Whitehead Table of Preferential Leads
This is the designation given to a set of recommended and/or established leads as defenders against No Trump and suit contracts, developed by Mr. Wilbur Whitehead during the early years of Contract Bridge and Duplicate Contract Bridge. See: Whitehead Trophy.
A trophy donated by Mr. Wilbur Whitehead in 1930 for the North American Championship Women’s Pairs. The trophy was presented to the winner and contested at the Summer North American Bridge Championship until 1962, and then presented to the winner and contested at the Spring North American Bridge Championship.
This term designates the fore-runner of all end-game problems, which was devised and published on January 31, 1885, by Mr. W.H. Whitfield.
At the age of 105 and still going strong, Mr. John Whittemore, in the month of November, 2004, set a national record for the javelin throw. In his day, he was a Stanford baseball player, a tennis champion, a competitive swimmer and, later, a track star with a local masters group called Club West. When he wasn't pouring himself into sports, he played a ferocious game of bridge.
Described through a total number rather than a specific identity. For example: showing a total of two Kings, rather than which ones they actually are, would be showing Kings wholesale.
This phrase describes a suit in which the declarer has no stopper to prevent the opponents from gaining control of the play.
Wilkosz Convention or Wilkosza Convention or Polish 2 Diamond Convention - This is a .pdf file format and is in the Polish language. Any visitor wishing to translate this version would greatly benefit the bridge community. This information has been compiled by Mr. Marek Wójcicki Przemysl. Since the English-based computer keyboards do not recognize the Polish characters, this .pdf file has been printed off the Internet in its original form and therefore contains the URL in the content in Poland, where this information is located. This is a variation of the Wilkosza 2 Diamonds conventional method.A conventional bidding system devised by the expert bridge player Mr. Andrzej Wilkosz during the 1960s. The designation of the original version is also called The Polish 2 Diamond. There are several variations of this conventional method since the original version was deemed to be a "Brown Sticker", meaning that most bridge sponsoring organizations banned and/or limited the use of such methods.
Win, The Perhaps Closest
The year was 1949. The contest was the North American Winter National Tournament. The players were Helen Sobel and Margaret Wagar against Peter Levintritt and Edson Wood. The score was 955.2223 for the ladies and 955.2179 for the gentlemen. The victory margin of .0044 match points was the result of the perhaps complicated scoring system employed to factor down the point carry-overs from one round to the next round. Source: BSHward-P93.
This is a secondary squeeze and forces the opponents to make a decision regarding a throw-in or to unblock. Whatever the decision is, each of the actions of the opponents will lost a trick. The name for this sort of squeeze originated with Mr. Terence Reese.
1. a card that is expected to take a trick in either the dummy or in the declarer’s hand;
2. a card that is expected to take a trick held by either opponent;
3. a term describing a player, a pair, or a team with the highest score at a tournament event.
The card that takes the trick.
A designation for the card that takes the trick. By a No Trump contract it is always the highest card played in the suit that has been led. It may also be a long card, led in a suit to which the other players cannot follow. By suit contracts, the same principles will apply except that on a trick where more than one trump is played it is the highest trump that will win the trick.
Winslow System - Winslow's System
A bidding system devised and named after Mr. Thomas Newby Winslow, 1865-1942. The system, presented and published in a series of booklets beginning in 1930 and also in the book Win With Winslow, published 1933, anticipated the Four Aces System in its 1.5 - 1.0 - 0.5 point count and canape in showing the lowest four-card suit first regardless of the strength of that suit. For example: 9864 would be bid before AKQJ96. The object of the system was to exchange both distributional and high card information early and often by artificial or semi-artificial bids.
This bidding system was published in his book titled Winslow's System In Contract Bridge, c1935, Publisher: T.N. Winslow, East Orange, New Jersey, LC: 35009894
This bidding system was played by several bridge experts during this era including Mr. C. Lochridge during the peak of its popularity. The bidding system, however, did not win the approval of the bridge community since the defenders were apparently provided with too much information and could actually play and defend as double-dummy, and could use such information in their bidding.
Wittes Adjunct to New Minor Forcing
The origin of this treatment is unknown. When employing New Minor Forcing as the partnership agreement, the partnership may wish to show the quality of the opener's holding in the responder's Major suit.
Wolff Signoff Bids or Wolff Convention
A method devised by Mr. Bobby Wolff and permits the responder to stop the auction at the three level, after the opener has made a jump rebid of 2 No Trump.
The Wolff Signoff can also be used by the responder as a second bid in the ACOL bidding system.
Note: This method should not be confused with the Checkback Stayman convention.
This event is a four-session event consisting of two qualifying rounds and two final rounds and is contested for the Whitehead Trophy. From 1969 through 1971 this event was contested as a three-session championship. This trophy donated by Mr. Wilbur Whitehead in 1930 for the North American Championship Women’s Pairs. The trophy was presented to the winner at the Summer North American Bridge Championship until 1962, and then presented at the Spring North American Bridge Championship.
A term to describe a defensive bidding system against strong artificial one Club sequences. They are generally applied when the partnership is vulnerable. IDAK, or Instant Destroyer and Killer, (or IDAC, meaning Instant Destruction Against A Club) is used by favorable vulnerability.
Wont versus No Trump Defense Mechanism
This is a variation developed by Mr. Glen Ashton of Ottario, Canada, for defense against the opening of No Trump by the opponents. This information has only been preserved and archived on this site in the form of a .pdf file.
This conventional method originated with Mr. John-Hallvard Woodgrove of Norway. The Woodgroves Multi conventional method begins with the opener bidding 2 Diamonds. The holding of the opener can vary according to the partnership understanding and will be clarified during the ensuing auction. The employment of the Woodgroves Multi is to some degree questionable and should be cleared with the governing bridge organization.
Woodgroves Two Clubs
This conventional method originated with Mr. John-Hallvard Woodgrove of Norway. These devised responses are adjusted to fit with and complement the Woodgroves Multi conventional method, but can also be employed independently.
Woodson Two-Way No Trump
Devised by Mr. William Woodson, an opening of 1 No Trump can have two interpretations. The first is a range from 10 to 12 high card points, and the second is a range from 16 to 18 high card points, regardless of vulnerability. In order to understand which interpretation should be applied, the responder bids 2 Clubs, and by partnership agreement, the opener then clarifies his strength holding.
Woolsey Defense To 1 No Trump Openings
The magazine Bridge Today, founded by Matthew and Pamela Granovetter, is a bi-monthly publication, and its regular columnists include a variety of expert players, teachers, and writers from around the world. One of the contributors to the magazine is Mr. Christopher R. Woolsey, also known as Kit. The following is part of his articles describing the Woolsey Defense to 1 No Trump openings.
The designation is a combination of the first letters of Weak Opponents No Trump. The designation is also sometimes referred to as Wreck Opponents No Trump. The concept was developed by Mr. Rakesh Kuman of Sydney, Australia. This version of the write-up is by Mr. Glen Ashton and is presented in a .pdf file format and archived and preserved on this site for future reference.
Work-Peterson Accurate Valuation System of Contract Bridge
This is a method of valuation for the entire and total holding for thirteen cards as developed and defined by Mr. Milton Work and Mrs. Olive Peterson, one of the foremost female bridge players of all times beginning in the early 1930s, and published in their book The Work-Peterson Accurate Valuation System of Contract Bridge, c1934, by publisher The John C. Winston Company, Philadelphia, Pensylvania and Chicago, Illinois, OCLC: 3344065. Additional details and information is not presently available.s
Work Point Count
This is the 4-3-2-1 point count based on the concept of Mr. Bryant McCampbell of around 1915, and which is still almost standard practice in modern bridge. This counting guideline was later promoted and published by Mr. Milton Work in 1923.
A phrase to describe honor cards of potential value to the partnership in its intended strain. The term also applies to high cards, which, on the basis of the auction, rate to combine well with the hand of the partner for suit play. For instance, a secondary honor or an unsupported King is normally discounted opposite a known singleton, whereas any top honor is likely to be a working card if it is in one of the suit of the partner.
World Junior Team Championship
This event has become a prestigious event for players under the age of 26 years old. The event occurs every other year, in odd years, and is hosted by the WBF. The ACBL teams are selected in the off years at the Junior Team Trials held in conjunction with the Summer NABC. The qualifying teams enter a training program for the year prior to the event.
World Transnational Open Teams Championship
The World Transnational Open Teams Championship came into being in 1997 in Hammamet, Tunisia. It is contested by teams nominated by the NBOs without nationality or other restrictions. The first winners were the team led by Leandro Burgay of Italy, while in the second edition the title went to the USA team captained by Rose Meltzer. In Paris, the winning team consisted of American and Brazilian players and was captained by Malcolm Brachman.
World University Bridge Championship
The idea to organise Championships for University Students originated with Mr. Lode Lambeets, of the University of Antwerpen, after he had seen the organisation of the University Chess World Championship in Antwerpen in 1992. He contacted Mr. Paul Magerman, then president of the European Community Bridge League, and between them they put together the first European Union Bridge Championship.
Note: The official website for such bridge championships and which reports on these events, among other events, is the Official Website of the Intenational University Sport Federation located on the Internet at FISU. FISU is the French designation in letters provided by the World Bridge Federation and means: Fédération Internationale du sport Universitaire. The translation is the International University Sports Federation. The inclusion of the sport of bridge was decided April 2001 and the first bridge event in Belgium was planned and announced. Warning: the French letters may not appear correctly on your browser.
Related Material: University Bridge by Geert Magerman of the European Bridge League - also .pdf file.
The First World University Bridge Championship was conducted in Bruges, Belgium, between August 4 to August 13, 2002. Reports of this bridge event are also archived on this site in .pdf file format only for future reference. Also archived for future reference (Source: http://www.fisu.net/site/page_413.php.) is the following .pdf file, which also provides information on the First World University Bridge Championship.
Support was sought and received from FISU, the International Federation for University Sports, and from the University of Antwerpen. Both of these continue their support for this championship until this very day.
Since a student's career is hopefully a short one, The European Community Bridge League decided to make this an annual event.
The ECBL, renamed European Union Bridge League in 1995, was dissolved in 1998. Among the assets it transferred to the European Bridge League were these championships and the EBL needed no persuasion to continue the University Championships under its banner.
In 1999 it was decided to turn the European Championship into World Championships in even-numbered years and the first such event was held in 2000 in Maastricht, where it was incorporated into the Olympiad.
That event was not officially recognised as a "World Championship" by FISU, but now that recognition has been given, and today witnesses the start of the first World University Team Championships.
The Second World University Bridge Championship was conducted in Istanbul, Turkey, between October 31 to November 6, 2004. Reports of this bridge event are also archived on this site in .pdf file format only for future reference (Source: http://www.fisu.net/site/page_443.php.).
The Third World Univeristy Bridge Championship will be held in Tianjin, China, between October 21 and October 27, 2006.
World Wide Pairs
This is an international competition and is currently run in June of each year. The event is scored as usual at the local level and matchpointed around the world at the world level.
World Youth Team Championships
A zonal teams competition for players up to 26 years old inaugurated in 1987 and held every two years (in odd-numbered years until 2005, in even-numbered years as from 2006).
The tournament is the flagship competition for young players and has a similar format to the Bermuda Bowl. Participants have at stake the Ortiz-Patino Trophy, presented by the WBF President Emeritus Jaime Ortiz-Patino who conceived the idea while serving as WBF President in 1985.
A series for teams of players up to 21 years was decided to be introduced in conjunction with the 10th competition, but the inaugural event was held, exceptionally, in 2004 in New York.
Worthless Singleton or Worthless Doubleton
This designation describes a holding of one or two cards below honor rank in a suit. Generally at No Trump play such a holding is a detriment to success. In the trump suit, either holding is less than adequate for trump support until the suit has been rebid twice.
Devised by Mr. Philip Wraight. Playing Acol, the bridge player may have a problem as responder with a balanced 10 count, if the bridge player is unable to bid a four card suit at the one level, since 1 No Trump shows 6-9 points except over 1, and the 2 No Trump rebid shows 11-12 points. The bridge player is also in difficulty with a balanced 3-3-3-4 hand with 6-7 points if partner opens 1, when a raise in Clubs takes the bridge player past what may be the best contract of 1 No Trump. This can be true of both Minors if you are playing Inverted Minor raises. This information has only been preserved and archived in .pdf file format on this site for future reference.
An attempt to find an alternative contract, often after having been doubled by the opposing side. This can be achieved by keeping the bidding alive by either doubling or redoubling, thereby giving one of the members of your partnership the opportunity to show a better escape suit.
This is the designation given to a variation of the concept of Wriggle by Mr. Bill Macmillan. Employing this variation provides a method for escaping from 1 No Trump, doubled. After a penalty double, just trying to escape may make the opponents abandon the pursuit of penalties in favour of their own contract. This information has only been archived and preserved on this site in .pdf file format.
This is a variation in the bidding technique such that each bidder writes his/her bid on a sheet, which is then passed to him/her as it becomes his turn to bid. This is to prevent the so-called huddle, since, in this fashion no information can be conveyed to the partner by mannerism, gesture, or inflection, and the need for a review of the bidding at any time is removed. The pad passed around is frequently referred to as the Dumb Bidder. It has also been used in International Matches, because it lends itself to symbolic notation, understood even with a severe language barrier.
It can happen that a certain board has been wrongly placed, played, or has begun to be played before the situation has been discovered. Under these circumstances the director must be called to make a ruling. See Law 15.
LAW 15 - PLAY OF A WRONG BOARD
A. Players Have Not Previously Played Board
If players play a board not designated for them to play in the current round:
1. Score Board as Played
The Director normally allows the score to stand if none of the four players have previously played the board.
2. Designate a Late Play
The Director may require both pairs to play the correct board against one another later.
B. One or More Players Have Previously Played Board
If any player plays a board he has previously played, with the correct opponents or otherwise, his second score on the board is cancelled both for his side and his opponents, and the Director shall award an artificial adjusted score to the contestants deprived of the opportunity to earn a valid score.
C. Discovered during Auction
If, during the auction period, the Director discovers that a contestant is playing a board not designated for him to play in the current round, he shall cancel the auction, ensure that the correct contestants are seated and that they are informed of their rights both now and at future rounds. A second auction begins. Players must repeat calls they made previously. If any call differs in any way from the corresponding call in the first auction, the Director shall cancel the board. Otherwise, play continues normally.
A term to describe the less favorable placement of the declarer in regards to the opponent who must lead to the first trick, and who knows that a lead from his partner could possibly ensure a better score.Also used as an action.
|Home Page I||Home Page II|