Interview with Ron Klinger
Interview published in Bridge Magazine (UK) - October 1994
On a recent promotional visit to Britain, Australia's most famous bridge personality popped into the Chess and Bridge offices in Euston Road. Mike Whittaker sat him down, gave him a coffee and grilled him about his career, his life, his work and his plans for the future.
Ron Klinger is one of the top bridge teachers and authors in the world. He has over thirty bridge books to his name and has represented Australia with distinction on numerous occasions, including an impressive debut in the 1976 Olympiad where he was awarded the BOLS brilliancy prize. The hand in question is shown later, but let us introduce you firstly to the man who is widely thought of as being one of the best bridge writers in the world.
Welcome to Bridge Magazine, Ron, and thanks for taking time out of your busy schedule. What have you been doing during your visit to the UK?
-Firstly let me say how much I've enjoyed my stay here. I've
been involved
with the release of the new Basic Bridge, an
updated version of the 1970s
book, in conjunction with Pat Husband and Andrew Kambites. We hope this
new
edition is an even better book for bridge teachers and will help them
to
structure their classes. It was great to spend some time at the EBUTA
jamboree
in Nottingham, meeting teachers and giving some talks. I also visited
some
bridge clubs including the new South Bucks bridge centre, very
impressive, and
did some work with Gollancz on the Master Bridge series.
Some new titles to look forward to then?
-There will be, yes. I'm working with Andrew Kambites on
'Bridge Conventions
for You' which is aimed at club players. I don't
want to give too much
away about any other titles though!
That's good to hear. I was a little worried reading the introduction to Tony Forrester's Secrets of Success, where he says he felt that every topic in bridge had been well and truly covered. You don't think so?
-No. It depends on whom you're aiming the book at. I don't
really write for
the expert player at all. Mostly I write for the average player. Having
taught
them for a number of years I think I have a good idea of what they like
and what
they need. I know the kind of problems they have.
When did your interest and involvement in bridge start?
-I used to play a lot of chess and it was in the national
junior chess
championship in Queensland that I was introduced to bridge. We had no
chess
matches in the mornings so someone taught us how to play bridge.
Nothing
complicated of course, we called out our points and our best suit and
took it
from there. So after ten days of the chess tournament I could play
bridge. I was
only seventeen then and bridge never really hit me until my
midtwenties.
How did that happen?
-The impetus was a friend of mine winning a national
championship. We had
been at school together and I thought that if he could manage it then
anyone
could. I'd already dropped chess by then. I'd had enough of it and lost
interest.
How long was it before your first success at bridge?
-Success came quite easily. I suggested to the same friend who'd won the national championship that we have a game some time. We did, and became partners for seven years. He was good friends with the top players in Sydney and I got to know them. After about a year I was invited to play with Tim Seres in our national events and played a whole season with him, winning the national teams that year. It was fantastic and I was lucky to have been involved.
When did you get involved in writing?
-That was much later. I became part of the Australian bridge
magazine team in
the early seventies and started teaching a lot as well. I didn't like
the book
we were using much. It was too difficult for beginners and I thought I
could do
much better. The result was Bridge Basics, the Standard American
version. That was in 1972. Four years later I wrote the Acol version
and called
it Basic Bridge.
Which bridge authors do you enjoy reading yourself?
-I've read all of Kelsey's books, and Mike
Lawrence's. At the moment I like
Barry Rigal's book and Larry Cohen's. I haven't read Tony Forrester's
but I like
the Robson/Segal book. A bit long for some people perhaps, but it's a
very good
book. The best ever was 'Bridge with the Blue Team' by
Forquet. I'd
always read three or four hands from it before a tournament.
Let's talk about selection procedures for our national teams. Glyn Liggins had some comments to make in his July editorial about the latest policy in this country, namely the reintroduction of a panel system, where pairs on the panel are eligible for selection without having to play in the trials. Where do you stand on this one?
-I don't agree. If they can't make it in the trials they
shouldn't be in the
team. If I had anything to do with the administration here I'd vote
against the
idea. There is no reason why anyone should be exempted from playing in
the
trials. Besides, the other trialists should be given the chance to play
against
them as well. The players on the panel may well be great players but
they have
to be able to do it when it matters, whether it is in the trials or in
the
Bermuda Bowl.
So if they are good enough to play in the team they are good enough to win the trials?
-Exactly. They should earn the right to be in the team and if
they can't win
the trials they shouldn't be in the team.
What system of selection do you have in Australia?
-Well, it used to be good. You had to win
one of our national
tournaments and then all the winning teams would play off to see which
one would
represent the country. If a team had won more than one of the national
events it
would receive a slight benefit, maybe the right to play twenty extra
boards if
it was behind at the end of a match. I thought that system was good. It
produced
winners.
Nowadays it's different. In almost every national tournament
you can earn a
certain number of points. At the end of the year the leading
pointscorers are
asked to form four teams. You don't have to play with the same partner
or teammates.
It's all very hostile, with sponsors going round tempting players away
to join
'their team. It's not right.
What selection process would you choose?
-I'd go back to what we had before. Why not? If one team was
consistently
near the top but failed to win then it would be tough luck. You don't
want
players who come second all the time. You want players that can win.
I'd
introduce that system here as well. Take the winners of your four main
events
and have a playoff to see who represents the country. Winner
takes all.
What is the condition of junior bridge in Australia?
-It's pretty good, I think. There is a significant youth
programme in every
state, with youth championships and an interstate event. The
under26s play
the same format as the open and women's teams, travelling to other
cities and
playing against teams from other states.
Does bridge receive more or less media coverage in
Australia than in this
country?
-Definitely less than you have here. It's hard to encourage
any but the
biggest newspapers to take bridge columns. The only time you get real
publicity
is when something bad has happened.
This is the centenary year of bridge. How do you see the future for bridge over the next hundred years?
-I'm very doubtful about being able to attract sufficient
young players into
bridge. They are so involved with computers, it's going to be hard to
get them
into bridge. I don't know that we've got a hundred years' future.
Things will be
very different. The Internet system is going to be so popular and that
will
affect bridge as we know it. You'll be able to play in events without
leaving
your house.
There have been some steps forward in the last ten or twenty
years. Bidding
boxes for example, and screens in the big international events. They
really help
you relax. You don't have to concentrate on not looking at your partner
and
that's a big help. Every change has met with some opposition of course,
but
that's only natural. The game has benefited overall.
Many thanks for sharing your comments with us, Ron. Have a safe journey back to Oz. and we look forward to enjoying more books from you in the years ahead.
The hand below shows Klinger's play at its best. Sitting West, Klinger heard his partner open three spades third in hand. South overcalled four hearts, and Klinger doubled.
A spade was led to East's ace and a trump returned, Klinger ducking when South played the queen. After a spade ruff in dummy South played a club to the queen and West's ace. South won the club return, ruffed dummy's last club in hand and played hearts, Klinger winning the second round with his king. This was the position with Klinger, West, on lead:
Klinger found the winning defence, exiting with the king of diamonds. South could no longer make the contract, having to lose either a spade or a trump. Pretty neat defence, especially on your debut in a world championship (1976 Olympiad vs USA).