Friday, 31 May 2013


Dear Rebecca,

When a dog becomes old and infirm it is often the kindest thing to have it put down. In the
same way surely, it would be both cruel and heartless to keep my partner alive.
Over the past few years his game has really gone to pot. His brain is completely addled. He can't tell his clubs from his spades. He is unable to recall the bidding or what cards have just been played. His system card is now bereft of any meaningful conventions, and he revokes more often than not. As for his declarer play, random selection of cards has now become the norm. 
Surely To God the field is entitled to be rid of someone who hands out gifts on every board to all and sundry. Similarly, the committee, club members and I , not to mention his poor stressed out family, are all entitled to see an end to his suffering, by enlisting say a hired professional to put him out of his misery.  

Yours Yuthen Nazia

Dear Yuthen,

A guy like that in my club would still be ranked as one of the better players. Nevertheless, I do know a man who will do  " the job " for as a little as £2,000, so long as the money paid over is in used notes, with no questions asked.

Your always looking to oblige, Rebecca   

Wednesday, 29 May 2013

DR. JOHN'S CASE NOTES : THE TACTLESS TOSSER SYNDROME ( formerly known as the Chronic Faux Pas Syndrome )

TTS is a common mental disorder that is generally present in those full-of-bullshit, up-their-own-arses, lord-of-the-manor bridge players. Sufferers seem unable to tell the difference between socially acceptable comments and darn right verbal abuse.
As the condition worsens they are no longer able to comprehend what is appropriate to say and do , when dealing with partners, opponents, TDs and other club members. Symptoms include being inconsiderate and generally as " shitty " to friends and foe alike , the common offensive use of racial epithets , and a tendency to interfere uninvited in other people's business just for the laughs. The most commonly used interjection is " You ought not to have done that...." when nosing in on bridge hand discussions. Their odious and obnoxious behaviour inevitably leads to a rapid turnover of partners, and a general alienation of all contacts within the club.
TTS has been known to be cured by extreme measures. For example, a few months ago at Stourbridge BC a chronic sufferer called a visiting black player  " a nigger ", completely unaware of his heavyweight professional boxing credentials ! Similarly, another hard lesson was learnt at Perth BC,  when a syndrome victim foolishly called a psychopathic gay bridge player " a fag ". The resulting ass-beatings did manage to shock the victims back into recognition of their blundering faux pas. 
However, if the condition has remained untreated for long enough, then any attempt to cure the patient may prove ineffective, and only encourage him/her to make even more horrendous and offensive comments. Many club committees which failed to act  discovered that falling membership resulted in the only ones staying on being those who were either deaf or hard of hearing. However, by allowing the easily offended, highly sensitive members to disappear is clearly not a desirable solution , when most committees have the power to ban TTS sufferers instead. 
In instances where more robust committees have taken disciplinary measures to impose life-long bans, the afflicted sufferers have all successfully relied on the defence of free speech, claiming  " that the days of Stalinism are confined to the past. " 
However, in one club the chairman, Howard Bigot-Johnson,  solved the problem overnight. The TTS victim was taken down into the cellars of the Slaughter House, whereupon his tongue was cut out and his vocal chords severed.          

Tuesday, 28 May 2013


-  It's a privilege and a honour to be granted an interview with you....the great Northern Pro
-  Too right it is.....I don't normally give up my time for riff raff journalists like yourself......I've got 
   books to write 
-  Well, I see that you've won the prestigious Pheonix Club Championship Pairs event with a
   stunning 69% score in the second session
-  Yes......and if it wasn't for my hapless partner occasionally going walkabout we would have 
   cracked 80%
- how come when I spoke to your partner yesterday, he claimed that you had been
   showered with lots of unexpected gifts from very over-obliging opponents
-  How dare you insinuate that my success was down to good fortune and not my
   class bridge players make their own luck by forcing or trapping opponents into reaching 
   unmakeable or inferior contracts. Sadly, the bidding tactics I use to lead the opponents astray 
   are often lost on my one-dimensional partner
-  Yes....but that doesn't explain why on board 26 both opponents passed out the hand,  when 
    each had a 12 count....... giving you a galactic top in the process. Surely, that wasn't down to 
    your clever bidding ?
-  Listen muppet brain.....that particular pair were still shell-shocked from the previous board, 
    when I doubled on a 5 count in the pass out seat. This pushed them up a level, only to play 
    their contract off......... by foolishly placing me with most the missing key cards. 
-  So in all honesty how do you rate yourself as a player ?
-  Magnificent !
-  Is that it ?
-  Can anything be better than magnificent ?
-  No.....I guess not
-  Well, I'm off now to add another bidding refinement to my highly original, extremely convoluted
   bidding system.....
-  So what's it called ?
-  I've aptly named it the BAMBOOZLE CLUB.......and once I finish my book on it then everyone
   will have the chance to appreciate and adopt a truly great bidding system 
-  But are all the system bids legal ?
-  Of course they are.....but the sheer complexity of artificial bids and stepped responses ....... 
    where natural suit bids don't exist anymore.......are more than enough to see off LOLs,  
    causing panic and confusion in the ranks of bridge numpties and illiterates.......
-   I'm speechless !
-'re not a man of vision              

Monday, 27 May 2013



Never one to miss an easy inference, Johnny brought home his 6H slam to the delight of his team mates.
The defence got off to cracking start with the jack of clubs lead which the maestro took straightaway at trick one. Ruffing out diamonds high whilst clearing trumps in the process, it was imperative to end up in dummy in order to get off lead with a low club.
When his LHO opponent played the 7 of clubs under dummy's 8,  Johnny knew that that this expert defender held the king of spades !. For him to take the club trick only to finesse himself in spades would be the act of a madman or complete fool. Moreover, he desperately needed his partner to take the trick with the club 10, and fire a spade through and put declarer on a guess.
But Johnny didn't need to guess. When his RHO switched to a low spade, the 10 was immediately inserted from dummy being the only possible winning option........and the slam came rolling home. 
So I ask you, is there any player on God's earth who can match the sheer brilliance of this man other than The Northern Pro ? 

Saturday, 25 May 2013


Club member ( CM ) : Well, upon my soul....isn't that the very same elephant.......which for ages has been holed up in your committee room  ? 
B-J : What elephant ?
CM : The one over there ,  which happens to be sitting on the bonnet of the treasurer's car 
B-J : What elephant.....I can't see one at all !
CM : My's that larger than life grey thing...... with its mate coming over for a chat
B-J  ( shouting to the treasurer ) : Wilma........stick your bleedin' head out of the window and tell me if you can see an elephant
Wilma : ........I'm looking.....I'm looking.....but not an elephant in sight
CM : I give up ....
B-J : Oh dear... oh dear.......Might I suggest you see an optician.....or a psychiatrist
CM : Get stuffed !
B-J : That's've crossed the line.... I'm gonna have you up on a disciplinary you bugger 

Thursday, 23 May 2013


The other day I read an article outlining 10 good reasons for people should take up bridge. Well beneath all this glossy hype there lurks a harsh reality. So for all those who want to know what the darker side of bridge is all about, please read the red comments that follow the rose-tinted views that are so often used to promote this game. 

1. You 'll use your mind and stay mentally sharp. Those gifted with rapier-like minds will cut you to bits first.
2. You'll find new friends at bridge games wherever you travel in the world. What friends ? No bugger will want to be your partner if you turn out to be a complete dork at this game.
3. You can associate with bright, inquisitive people. The chances of you ever being acknowledged or accepted by these aloof, smart-arsed bastards are zero.
4. Bridge will keep you away from the television and the refrigerator. Oh yes, as if sitting on your arse for hours, lifting featherweight cards,  is ever going to be a healthier life-style !  
5. You can enjoy a bridge cruise with a celebrity host. So you end up paying a small fortune just to be seasick, or at worst being sunk by an iceberg.
6. You'll feel a bond with people from all walks of life who also love the game. The only bonds you'll establish with partners come in 2 forms : metal or paper chains. The first represent a life of inescapable torture, while the other represents waver thin relationships torn asunder in a matter of weeks.
7. You'll be able to play in the same tournaments as national and world champions. But at what price ?  Remember, you'll only there to make up the numbers, to be stomped all over by these experts, and revered only as " sacrificial lambs " to be crucified and slaughtered.
8. You'll feel the thrill of executing an advanced play and enjoy the confidence it brings. The only execution you'll expereience is  when your head is ceremoniously placed on the chopping block. Indeed, it is far more likely you'll be leaving the club mentally battered, drained of all emotion, self-confidence and self-esteem.
9. As you get better, you'll be able to measure your progress. This measurement of course involves reviewing the huge reductions to your cash assets, as climbing up the ladder rankings involves spending thousands (£) on accumulating meaningless " greenies " .
10. But most of all - you'll have fun. Well, maybe for those with masochistic tendencies,  who will obviously enjoy the pain and relentless abuse inflicted upon them by merciless bullying partners.


Tuesday, 21 May 2013

PERCEPTIONS : OH HOW THEY DIFFER...... ( Article by Dr. Sigmund T. Schukelgruber )

The most fascinating thing about people is how they can all look at an object, or incident ,  but see something completely different.
In bridge.  where partnerships are made up of strong aggressive types paired up with weak passive punchbags, their perceptions of one another's behaviour will be miles apart. The intolerant no-nonsense expert will see his behaviour as perfectly reasonable and acceptable, whereas the hapless, under-pressure, long-suffering partner will , without doubt , have a completely different take on what he/she is experiencing. So let's now look at the gulf which exists between their respective perceptions :

How the intolerant expert sees himself............................How the under-siege partner defines his behaviour  

There's nothing wrong with voicing..................It's pathetic the way he keeps on throwing
my opinions                                                 these outrageous tantrums

Letting partner know where he went................Please God can someone stop him droning on !
wrong is so important

My criticism is purely constructive....................After that bollocking I haven't a shred of self-
                                                                       confidence left 

As caring and concerned teacher........................Why are you such a sadist !

I'm helping you to develop your game..................Any more of this torture and I'll surely top myself

Excuse me if I sound a little harsh.....................You are nothing more than a mean evil bastard

I speak the truth...............................................I've never felt so insulted and abused !

It's vital to go over things again.........................Don't you ever let things lie, you merciless bully 

Helping partner is a worthwhile sacrifice..............I'm being nailed to a wooden cross yet again

It's vital partner gets the point.............................That tosser always wants to needle me. Why ?  


Saturday, 18 May 2013

MEMBER v. CLUB DISPUTES : RESOLVING THEM IN COURT IS MADNESS.........( Article by Professor Hu Chi Ku Chi ) 

Common sense screams out that most disputes need to be resolved out of court. This high risk option should only be considered when all other avenues have been tried and exhausted. The costs involved in court actions will be obscenely disproportionate in relation say to damages claimed or awarded .
In my opinion,  it is far better to remain aggrieved and wronged but stay financially healthy, as opposed to fighting for justice and heading towards bankruptcy. If justice is to be fought for, then ADR has to be the most sensible way forward. What is the point of winning a battle and getting nominal damages, if the war is then lost when substantial court costs are awarded against you. 
The reasons why both parties need to seek compromise or conciliation in the form of a truce are both powerful and compelling, but these four should always be enough to steer even the bitterest of rivals to settle their differences first, before settling out of court. 

1. Possible costs exposure . For the most part, the rule in litigation is that the losing party pays the winner's costs. By suing for damages above what the judge sees as appropriate ( and what the other party has offered to pay ) could well mean losing your case in court. Indeed, costs can be apportioned in such a way that if a party has been unreasonable in approaching possible settlement negotiations, then it is more likely that the other party will be leniently treated with regards to costs.
2. Time commitment. Litigation takes a long time, and as the clock keeps ticking the legal bill keeps rising. If the case goes to court one has to weigh up the opportunity cost of all the time and money spent on such a high risk venture : resources that could have been far better spent on worthwhile and productive endeavours.
3. The law could change. In many areas, the law is constantly evolving, and in some areas it is changing quickly. With regards to disputes involving unincorporated associations the law is both scant and murky, with parties having to sail through uncharted and dangerous waters. Case law is an unpredictable beast. New cases can be distinguished on the facts from established precedents , creating exceptions or even exceptions to the exceptions. Even judges in the lower courts have the freedom and flexibility to create new law. 
4. Uncertainty of outcomes . Even if you have complete confidence in your case, there is no such thing as a " sure thing " when it come to litigation. The painful reality is this : when you go to trial there is always some possibility that you will lose out whatever the outcome. Moreover,  in closely fought legal battles much can depend on the skill of your barrister, and whether or not the judge is a strict conservative or an open-minded liberal. How will the witnesses perform ? What precedents will be relied upon by the judge ?  And in whose favour ? 

In conclusion, disputes which set out to resolve a conflict of rights inevitably end up with both parties totally hell bent on recovering their costs. Telling them " it was madness " at the outset to even consider taking a dispute to court will be words that will come to haunt them both , because only when the total legal bill is calculated  ........ will the penny finally drop.        

Friday, 17 May 2013


  • You're Mad To Sponsor That So Called Expert................Xavier Monet
  • My Partner Did An Awful Thing To Me..............................Dee Flower
  • Partner, I Like To Be Treated As A Bridge God................Neil B. Formie
  • Unfancied Chinese Team Take The Bermuda Bowl...........Ho Lee Fuck
  • What ! We're Still In Pole Position.....................................Candice B. Furreal
  • Partner, What The Hell Are You Up To ?...........................Ruben Mycock
  • That Pompous Lady Is A Right Old Cow............................Beau Vine
  • No Way Was That Bid A Psych.......................................Jen U. Wynn
  • Look At Her Begging To Be His Partner............................Honor Nees
  • She Only Likes Partnering Men.......................................Fonda Dix

Wednesday, 15 May 2013

Bigot-Johnson Article


Many bridge players might give the impression of being a bridge geek but they are not. To qualify as a bridge geek,  at least fifty percent of the following character traits must be present :

1.  Male
2.  Heavily interested in bridge
3.  Displays classic autistic symptoms
4.  Can recall with alarming accuracy every hand he has ever played
5.  Always turns up to play bridge in the same shabby clothes
6.  Fascinated by the subtle complex intricacies of the game
7.  Works in the public sector
8.  A mummy's boy
9.  Only feels comfortable in the company of other bridge geeks
10. Has an abnormal appreciation for the mathematics behind bridge
11. Guilty of wearing odd socks or trousers that are far too short in the leg
12. Totally devoid of any sense of hair style and/or fashion
13.  Sex is hardly ever on his list of priorities
14.  Wet dreams occur only when recalling an exciting night at the bridge tables
15.  Only puts bridge books on his Christmas wish list 
16.  Personal hygiene habits often a cause for concern
17.  Always seen laughing at his own inane jokes
18.  Inward, poorly socialised
19.  Regarded by many as a generally educated eccentric know-all 
20.  Forever throwing tantrums when things go wrong        

Monday, 13 May 2013


Far too many bridge players are racked with self-delusion, believing themselves to be better players than they really are. Worse still, some of these fools go on to believe they are even better than their far more accomplished partners.

However, there are a small group of sad, honest, needy players who will go to great lengths to partner those with a much higher ranking and status. In their minds,  playing with an expert is a dream come true , but unfortunately for them living in the shadow of a giant has its drawbacks. But why does the giant agree to be part of an unequal,  lop-sided partnership ? Perhaps it is all down to a misplaced sense of friendship, loyalty, sympathy, kindness or custom. Who knows. Tragically, this desire to live in the shadows will always lead the constantly under-pressure victims to experience the following symptoms : 
1. chronic distress and guilt
2. outbursts of despair and anguish
3. self-mutilation, such as nail-biting, hair-pulling and head-banging   
4. tourette like behaviour with every other word being " sorry "
5. panic attacks and/or feelings of acute anxiety 
6. disabling discomfort in post-match discussions

These self-inflicted symptoms are the inevitable consequence of being in a partnership where one is clearly out of his/her depth. Confidence and self-esteem will ebb away to such a point that nerves will set in with a vengeance. The victim's will then of course become adversely affected,  severely limiting his/her ability to play even a normal game. The only redeeming virtue of his ill-matched partnership is that the expert will manage to pull the final result to just above average, through careful hogging of the bidding and exquisite declarer play.

To live in any shadow makes it hard too see the writing on the wall. Living in the shadow of a bridge giant certainly makes the victim appear completely blind. Yet the writing on the wall is so plain for all to see : " if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen ".         

Saturday, 11 May 2013

LAW REPORT : R v. BIGOT-JOHNSON ( & others) 2013

Yet again Bigot-Johnson was reported to the police by concerned members of the public, who were alarmed by what was going on inside the boundary walls of the Slaughter House BC. The RSPCA were also up in arms about reports of appalling neglect and cruelty shown towards friendly, harmless animals. Facing dozens of charges under the Animal Welfare Act 2007, Bigot-Johnson decided as usual to represent himself in court . A short extract from the trial's transcript can be seen below .

Prosecution counsel (CP ) : These acts of cruelty towards animals are on a scale that beggars belief
B-J : That's absolute rubbish.......the only animals I've ever set out to kill are the rats and vermin ....which regularly infest the club house premises
PC : Excuse me.....but I'm referring to rabbits
B-J : Rabbits ?
PC : Yes rabbits....those little, cuddly, soft-furry creatures with cute noses, floppy ears and fluffy bits.........which you and your cronies systematically hunt down. Why it is a well known practice in this club of yours.........for you and other top pair up.....and gang up.......whenever a major competition takes place. Because let's face it .......these big fields provide plenty of opportunities for " bunny bashing "
B-J : What !
PC : You.....and your skilled assassins.....systematically trample through these fields seeking out and carving up the rabbits. Carnage that is unbearable to watch. Cruelty that borders on the barbaric. 
B-J : What !
PC : Indeed, bridge is often described as a mind sport, but at the Slaughter House you have turned the game into a blood sport !
B-J : Hold on a mo.....these so called rabbits are nothing more than a load of duffers, fools, woodentops and buffoons.......human fodder infact.....who love the opportunity to take on top players even at the risk of getting a severe bashing.
PC : So would you say then that coming up against these rabbits is like shooting fish in a  barrel ?
B-J : Yes
PC : And I take it you like kicking ass ?
B-J :  Yes.....I damn well do
PC : Well, on those frank admissions about your cruelty towards fish and donkeys,  please come clean about any other abuses ?
B-J : Stone the crows ....
PC : My God...are there more ?
B-J : I'm flogging a dead horse here
PC : Have you no compassion for any animal....... whether it be dead or alive ?
Judge : I've heard enough.....and that last remark of yours Bigot was the final straw... the one that broke my camel's back. 
B-J : Oh....
Judge : So my job now is too inflict a punishment that hits the bull's eye so to speak. But thankfully, there is more than one way to skin a cat like you.......and having you sectioned indefinitely under the Mental Health Act is my preferred choice.
B-J : Bugger... 



Friday, 10 May 2013


Dear Rebecca,

Last weekend my partner and I went on spec to Bradford to play in a big green-pointed  EBU run pairs event . When we were told that the overnight hotel accommodation and entrance fee would be a staggering £500 for the 2-day event , I turned to my partner and said : " Well, for that money we could enjoy ourselves more if we went into town,  and spent the money on a couple of cheap hookers ! ".

So that's exactly what we did .

Yours concerned that bridge is becoming far too expensive to play,
                                                                                 Cecil Cheapskate

Dear Cecil,

God, if Sylvia and I had known of your presence at the venue, and your subsequent change of plans, we would have offered our services there and then. 

Yours always on the lookout for a quick trick,

Wednesday, 8 May 2013

HOW BLIND CAN COMMITTEES BE ?........ ( Article by Professor Hu Chi Ku Chi )

Answer : Not half as blind as the Penak Chinese Association committee was deemed to be, when the Federal Court judge of Malaysia,  Abdoolcader J.,  gave his judgement during the closing stages of an appeal, in the case of Chong v.Yong (1978).

Here the expelled member Yong won his case against the club hands down,  because the court believed that committee had shown " a total disregard of the fundamentals of fair play in action as to notice, hearing, due inquiry and also bias ", rendering the purported expulsion of the respondent wholly invalid. 

With reference to the committee's blindness , and blatant disregard to fair and proper procedure,  the judge made the following analogy : " Any attempt to look for the requisite fundamentals in this case would be reminiscent of a search by a sightless septuagenarian for a black cat in a feline sanctuary in Erubus, and I would express the hope that this judgement will have provided a stick or, better still, a guide-dog to obviate a recurrence of the events under consideration in any similar situation ". 

Clearly then, committee members the world over continue to reinforce the truth, found in the old adage,  " men are blind in their cause ". Yet for many a far greater truth exists in that " there's none so blind as those who will not see " .  Such is the curse of wearing blindfolds woven from ignorance and bias.

( This article is dedicated to the man who campaigned long and hard to have a member slung out from his club, only to have the good fortune later on to be part of the committee, which was about to review another complaint of alleged misconduct by this errant member. Needless to say the idea of stepping down from any deliberations and/or involvement in the disciplinary proceedings never crossed the man's mind. )    
A CURIOUS POINT OF LAW...... ( continued )

So can a social or sports club, despite failing to give a member an initial hearing or a fair one,  " get away " with such grave mistakes , when an appeal hearing makes ( or endorses ) the decision to expel that member ?  The answer it appears is far from certain.

Clearly, a member has a much stronger case for wrongful expulsion when the appeal process is itself less than perfect : it may be vitiated by the same defect as the original proceedings; or short of that there may be doubts whether the appeal body embarked on its task without predisposition, or whether it had the means to make a fair and full inquiry. In such cases it would no doubt be right to quash the original decision.

These are all matters ( and no doubt there are others ) which the court must consider. Whether these intermediate cases are to be regarded as exceptions from a general rule, as stated by Megarry J, or as a parallel category covered by a rule of equal status is not in their Lordship's judgement necessary to state. What is important is the recognition that such cases exist, and that it is undesirable in many cases of domestic disputes, particularly in which an inquiry and appeal process has been established, to introduce too great a measure of formal judicialisation. 

While flagrant cases of injustice, including breaches of natural justice and/or bias, must always be firmly dealt with by the courts, the tendency in their Lordship's opinion in matters of domestic disputes should be to leave these to be settled by the agreed methods without requiring the formalities of judicial processes to be introduced. So where an apparently sensible appeal structure has been put in place, the court is entitled to approach the matter on the basis that the parties have agreed to accept what in the end is a fair decision. However, this does not mean that the fact that there has been an appeal will necessarily have produced a just result. The test which is appropriate is to ask whether, having regard to the course of the proceedings, there has been a fair result.

Indeed, the facts of an individual case might well reveal that committees have badly erred by reason of bad faith and/or bias, or such other deficiency, the end result cannot be described as fair. The question of course in every case is the extent to which the deficiency alleged has produced overall unfairness.  

Tuesday, 7 May 2013

DISCIPLINARY MATTERS : A CURIOUS POINT OF LAW........ ( First of a 2 part article by Professor Hu Chi Ku Chi )

In a fairly recent case the Court of Appeal judges raised and discussed many interesting legal questions, concerning the expulsion of members from social clubs. One curious and fascination question was " What is the legal position of a club when the following happens ? A club member is expelled having received no initial hearing in the first place, or one which was flawed in some way,  but then he/she attends an appeal hearing which resulted in the committee's original decision being upheld ? 

In Leary v National Union of Vehicle Builders (1971 ) Megarry J appeared to have elevated the conclusion, which he thought proper in this particular type of case, into a rule of general application. In an eloquent passage he said :      " If the rules and the law combine to give the member the right to a fair hearing and the right of appeal,  why should he be told that he ought to be satisfied with an unjust hearing and a fair appeal ?    Therefore, as a general rule, I hold that a failure of natural justice in the initial hearing cannot be cured by a sufficiency of natural justice in the appellate body ".

However, top ranking judges thought that this rule was too broadly stated. Nevertheless, they affirmed the principle in a certain category of cases : these may well include trade union ones, where movement solidarity and dislike of the rebel, or renegade, may make it difficult for appeals to be conducted in an atmosphere of detached impartiality and so make a fair trial at the first  -probably branch-  level an essential condition of justice. But to seek to apply the principle generally, say to social clubs for instance, overlooks, in their Lordship's respectful opinion, both the express and implied terms of membership, which include no doubt an agreement that both parties will abide by fair decisions resulting from by the club's internal disciplinary procedures, notwithstanding some initial defect in the disciplinary process.

In such intermediate cases, it is for the court, in the light of agreements made, and in addition having regard to the course of proceedings, to decide , whether at the end of the day, there has been a fair result, reached by fair methods, such as the parties should fairly be taken to have accepted when they joined the association. Naturally, there may be instances when the defect is so flagrant, the consequences so severe, that the most perfect of appeals or rehearings will not be sufficient to produce a just result. 

Sunday, 5 May 2013

THE MOST TALKED ABOUT BRIDGE BOOKS IN 2012.........( says gossipmonger Pun )

  • Forensic Test Solves The Bridge Club Murder Mystery ?.......Deanne Nay
  • What One Has To Put Up With From Picky Opponents........Loda Hassall
  • Opening Leads Are Not My Forte..........................................Major Florr
  • I'll Have You Know I'm An Officer On This Committee...........Lou Tennant
  • My Partner Never Listens To A Thing I Say............................D. F. Kant
  • My Partner Does Whatever She Is Told................................Sheila Bay
  • Pre-tournament Nerves Makes My Partner Feel Sick...........Edna Bucket
  • When It comes To Bidding, My Partner's Got Balls...............Buster Gonads
  • That Man Can't Keep His Hands To Himself !........................Frew T. Buggar
  • I Hate People Who Feign An Interest In Bridge......................Art E. Fartees 


Dear Rebecca,

One of my partners is an intelligent, hellishly good looking young man, but half my age.     He is single , rich,  and well-endowed. He oozes charm and sex appeal, and one can only describe him as a " babe magnet ".
Yet, despite having the ability to pull any woman he wants for nights of wild, passionate sex, he prefers to spend all his spare time down at the club,  playing bridge with the old fogies like me.
So have you , being such a worldly-wise, well travelled, and knowledgeable woman, ever  come across a similar  " impossible but true " story as this ?    

Yours extremely perplexed,  Nora Way

Dear Nora,

In a word " no ". 
As for explanations behind this " impossible but true " story , I can only offer 4 :
1. The guy is a puff but refuses to come out of the closet
2. He's completely insane
3. He finds bridge far more stimulating and exciting than sex
4. He has a peculiar fetish in that he prefers " shafting " little old ladies at the tables as opposed 
    to voluptuous young ladies over the tables .

Yours refreshingly blunt, and sincerely Rood      

Friday, 3 May 2013


Dear Rebecca,

Just recently I've picked up some amazing  results, scooping up trophies I never thought possible,  given my status as non-expert player.
The reason behind this recent run of success simply comes down to the power of prayer. Whenever I pray for something to be right.... or happen at the table....... IT DOES !!  Once I was in a hopeless slam when the only chance of making it was a revoke by one of the opponents. My prayer was answered. On another occasion I prayed that a side suit needed to break 6-1, with the off-side stiff king coming down under my Ace. Again my prayer was answered. Many times I prayed that the opponents would pull out the wrong bidding card, or make the only opening lead which would land me the contract , and every time The Lord duly obliged. 
Even when I  asked the Lord to  " nobble " my nearest challenger, the next thing I knew was that a TD had expelled him from the tournament for using foul and abusive language. 
So does having God's help and assistance make me a cheat ?

Yours racked with guilt,  the Reverend Graham Blessing

Dear Reverend,

Cheating at bridge can viewed in many different ways : amoral, immoral, unethical, illegal, criminal and darn right nasty.  Indeed, such behaviour is an affront to God's teaching and sacred principles. God abhors cheats,  and therefore He would never allow Himself to be associated with such heinous and devilish practices.
Why, every bridge player I know repeatedly turns to prayer in moments of crisis,  and just because God has chosen to assist you does not make you a cheat.....just a rather fortunate, fortuitous, favoured, charmed, lucky, jammy toe rag.

Yours who has never had an even break, Miserably Rood


Thursday, 2 May 2013

REBECCA ROOD'S MAILBAG...................( unanswered )

Dear Rebecca,

At great sacrifice, and for sod all money, I agreed to be one of the TDs at the under 21 national trials held in Birmingham.
Well, would you Adam and Eve it, but I was called over to a table to resolve an alleged hesitation dispute, only for the offending player to call me " a wanker ".  This obnoxious, post-puberty, poxy-faced young lad certainly had no time or regard for anybody but himself.
But rather than getting annoyed, I allowed myself a smile. The irony of being called a wanker by a 14 year old boy, with a rather limp looking wrist,  was not lost on me.

Howard-Bigot Johnson