If the element of rashness could be exorcised from Bridge, a good many points could be saved by some players. I note this fault creeping in particularly in the use or the Redouble, in Slam-hunting, and in what is called "flag-flying," or keeping a rubber alive at too great a cost.
Here is a case where S was victim; N started vulnerable with a bid of Two Hearts; E passed and S held: • xxxx V
• Act Q 10 x x x 4.x x x
and called three Diamonds. W three
Spades; N Four Hearts; E doubled and N redoubled! The result was the loss of a thousand points; two tricks down redoubled, a serious loss. And what was the boasted Heart suit of N? Six to the K Q 10. There lay the error; there is no re-double without a solid suit to Ace K Q at least. In five Diamonds they would have been one down, probably doubled; a great save. Here on the other hand was a case where Slam actually lay but where to call it would have been rash and in no way good Bridge. The hand was played in Spades by N and his suit was K 10 x x x; his partner had supported the Spade suit but this does not necessarily guarantee the missing tops. The Slam lay simply because the Ace Q were found under and not over the bidder.
Another form of rashness is the weak pre-empt; it is often made to the score, thus: N and S vulnerable and sixty points. S held: die x x ✓ Qxxxx • Ace x x + Ace K x He called Two Hearts: W two Spades: N three Hearts; S doubled and there was no way out.
Worse still is the weak take-out over a call of one No Trump. E calls one No Trump. S holds: 4 x x x ✓ Kxx • x x ▪ AceQxxx He must pass; a call of two clubs if doubled by W at once may prove far too costly even as a game-saver.
Lastly there is the mistake of forcing a call out of partner unless real strength is held by the " forcer." Thus; S one Spade;
W two Spades. Now that is all right if W has either no Spades or very strong Spades plus real strength in at least two other suits. Otherwise a penalty " pass" may prove a far better proposition.