The Chinese Way

Many observers have stated that ‘the future of bridge belongs to China.’ As we approach the 2009 world’s championships in Brazil, I am wondering whether China will fulfill its promise and become a dominant force in international competition. The women’s teams have done well enough in the past, but never have reached the summit. The Open team has still to establish itself as a front-runner. The US may fight hard to keep its place at the top, but many players are senior citizens, and youth tends to prevail.

I have been reading Bobby Wolff’s sad and bitter memoir, The Lone Wolf, a self-portrait of an insider who still considers himself an outsider. One issue foremost in his mind is the sponsorship of national teams, and here there is a major difference between the US and China that is of particular interest. Bridge in the US has had a ‘grass-roots’ development. Ely Culbertson was the genius who changed the game into a business, while at the same time improving the method of play, but there came a time when the gulf between the aspiring world champion and the merely good player became too wide to be encompassed within one philosophy. I don’

t think there are many local players who know (or care) the extent to which the international scene has become largely dominated by pairs who employ highly artificial systems.

The leading American teams have been formed by sponsors willing to pay for the chance to become known as a world champion. Ideally the sponsor is the worst player on his team. Bobby Wolff begins his autobiography by accounting how he had to tell Ira Corn, sponsor of the legendary Aces, that he was not good enough to play as a member of the team. Corn was a business tycoon who felt that with the application of his natural ability and drive he could become an expert bridge player in a short period of time and personally lead his troops to a world’s championship. It is part of the grass-roots hype that anyone can win given hard work, desire, and a little luck. Corn knew how to organize, but, alas, he was not good enough as a player, and Bobby had to tell him so. (The unpleasant task of telling it like it is has fallen often upon Wolff’

s broad shoulders.) To his credit Corn stepped aside, but continued to foot the bills as the Aces went on to victory in 1970 and 1971 using the training methods imposed upon them from above. Wolff and Hamman developed their own version of the Neapolitan Club and became the unofficial leaders of many championship teams that followed over the next 25 years.

The development of bridge in China has been quite different from that in the West. The government was the first sponsor, a task now being assumed by large companies for the sake of prestige. Bobby Wolff relates how as president of the ACBL he went to China in 1993 to talk to government officials about the advantages of developing bridge as an international sport. He suggested one way to develop the game was to introduce it to children in primary school as a curriculum subject worth learning for its own sake. Somewhat to his surprise, the Chinese officials immediately accepted his off-hand proposal and asked him to see to the production of suitable textbooks in Chinese. To his regret he was unable to carry this through due to bridge politics back home. One hang-up was which system to foist upon innocent young minds. I suspect another was an aversion to the Chinese leadership in those days before China had become an economic necessity.

Kathy Wei had been at work in China before Wolff’s visit and had formed a working agreement with Deng Xiaoping, premier of China and a keen player. As a result of her work and the prestige associated with a head of state, Precision had become popular, a system imposed from above rather than grown from below. It was an elitist approach. Bridge was considered not only a worthwhile intellectual pursuit but also a discipline from which real-life lessons could be drawn. Let’s list some of these: patience, tolerance, politeness, honesty, humility in victory, graciousness in defeat, perseverance, anticipation, cooperation –

ironically, characteristics that may still be appreciated in the East, but which are falling out of favor in the West.

With ambitious sponsors winning is everything. With committees winning is paid lip-service, but the manner of winning takes precedence. That entails following established practices. Within past British selection committees the choice of Martin Hoffman was frowned upon, not because he was not a proven winner, but because his methods were considered too individualistic and somewhat unorthodox. The committee hoped to win with lesser talents. It is hard to say they were wrong, because that is how committees think. Will the Chinese officials do a better job?

To me there is a Platonic ideal –

a few mature, dedicated players get together voluntarily with an all-for-one-one-for-all attitude. They submit to a regimen of healthy food and vigorous exercise. They practice constantly together primarily to correct their psychological flaws. They must learn to stop blaming others for their own mistakes. They work as a team over a limited period of time with a limited objective in mind. We have a prime example to emulate: Iceland 1991. There are others. It is not a matter of size or money, but of devotion to a common cause. (Cue the theme from The Chariots of Fire.)

To want to win while remaining free to ‘do your own thing’, to me is misguided. I may have to eat those words after China faces USA in the Women’s Final. The Chinese ladies play a sedate version of Precision, but have been practicing against men’s teams in order to ‘toughen up’. They were manhandled by the redoubtable veteran pairs of the English team that defeated them narrowly in 2008. I have found Liu rather shaky, and I wonder how she will cope with the trauma of facing the highly individualistic and psychologically based style that Linda Lee (not me) has characterized as ‘women’s bridge at its best.’

China vs USA should be a most amusing clash of cultures.

The question that remains to be answered at this time is whether China will develop its own style. Coming late to the game, they have the benefit of all that has gone before, so they can pick and choose what to them appear to be the best methods. Being elitists, they don’

t have to start with SAYC and work their painful way up. Their leading pair, Zhong and Fu, are not even burdened with standard Precision c.1979. It may be too early to say there is a Chinese Way, but one may speculate while watching the top Chinese pairs perform in the recent Inter-Cities Championships. One distinctly Chinese tendency that has been noted is that of opening 1NT with a 4-4-4-1 shape. I can see responding a strictly limited NT with this shape, and I do so after a Big Club opening bid, but to open a strong NT with this shape may well cause insurmountable problems, and not just on minor suit slams. I was happy to find the following example of such damage.

Safly, safly, catch monkey

– from Scottish Proverbs (1832)

A strong NT structure has long been a primary feature of the Standard American approach, albeit one that is schizophrenically at odds with the rest of the system, including as it does a limited opener, asking bids, transfers, relays, and a space-saving version of Blackwood. The aim is to pass information efficiently and accurately. Despite their Precision heritage, the Chinese are no sticklers for accuracy as evidenced by their off-shape takeout doubles and their inclusion of 4-4-4-1 shapes to strong NT hands. Here is a hand from the finals where the winning team picked up 5 IMPs against such a bid.

Board: 27 Dealer: South Vul: None		Zhang
		♠	K 3
		♥	A 9 5 2
		♦	9 8 5 3 2
		♣	9 3
Dai				Yang
♠	A 8 7 4 2			♠	Q 10 9 6 5
♥	8 7			♥	J 10 4
♦	J 7 6			♦	10
♣	K 7 6			♣	A Q J 2
		Cheng
		♠	J
		♥	K Q 6 3
		♦	A K Q 4
		♣	10 8 5 4

 

Cheng	Dai	Zhang	Yang
1NT	Pass	Pass	2♠
Pass	Pass	Dbl.	Pass
3♥?	3♠	All Pass

 

BBO failed at a critical point so we are not certain of Cheng’s bid, but EW ended up in 3♠ making +140, when NS are cold for 4♥. What is most remarkable is Dai’s pass to partner’s 2♠ balancing bid. It makes sense, however, as it appears to be a part-score deal. Softly, softly: East can always bid one more spade if required to do so. At the other table the auction followed a course more in line with Western sensibilities.

Gan	Zhao	Wang	Fu
1♦	1S	Dbl.	3♣*
4♥	Pass	Pass	4S
Dbl.	All Pass

*Result: off 1

 

The trick in bidding 4-4-4-1 hands is to uncover the degree of fit in 2 suits. Fu’s fit-showing bid confirmed for Gan a double fit in the red suits. Fu and Gan followed up with the correct bids based on the information made available during the auction. That’s good.