In message
,
samsloan writes

I am concerned about negative reviews of the older bridge books. For
example, a review of "Contract Bridge for Beginners" by Charles Goren
at
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0671210521/ says:

"Unfortunately it teaches four card majors, which hardly anyone ever
uses anymore. If you want to learn bridge you'll find it much easier
to learn the right habits in the first place."

Is it really true that nobody uses four card majors any more? I assume
this means that they use five card majors. The book I am planning to
reprint uses four card majors. Is it that bad?

I have also read that nobody counts points any mo Ace = 4, King =
3, etc. Is that true?

I use four-card majors, and the point count you describe. I think this
is quite common in England.

By comparison to chess, some of the old Horowitz and Reinfeld books
are better for the beginner than anything published today, in my
opinion. Is the same not true for bridge?

I think there's a point that you are missing. Almost everything I can
read in a 50-year-old chess book is still true, and I can improve my
chess by reading it. Maybe a few of the lines it recommends have been
refuted; but even this won't matter if my opponent does not know the
refutation.

However, bridge is about communication. The way bridge players
communicate has changed a lot in the last fifty years. Even where we
still play four-card majors, we make (for instance) take-out doubles
more freely than formerly. If I read a bridge book that is more than 30
years old, much of what I learn about bidding and about what I can infer
from bids will be inappropriate to modern styles, and if I remember what
I read, it will make my game worse.

Nick
--
Nick Wedd