NOVEMBEE 1, 1887.] 



♦ KNOWLEDGE ♦ 



23 



d^ur a2af)i>t Column. 



By "Five op Clubs." 



CLEVEELY B.\D I'LAT. 



HAVE given some attention for a long time past to 

 the way in which good play at whist prevails over 

 had play : so that although for an evening, or even 

 for several days, inferior play may secure the greater 

 number of points, in the long run better play tells, 

 and a certain percentage of advance infallibly shows 

 itself ere many hundreds of points on either side 

 have been scored. Nearly always, I have observed, 

 the moie scientific play (by which I do not refer to 

 as knowing all the settled details of plaj- — the 

 'echo," the "penultimate," and so forth, but follow- 



such details 

 " signal," the 



ing true strategic principles) succeeds most notably against those 

 points on which the unscientific player is most apt to pride himself. 

 Among these are : — (1) Playing for ruffs; (2) drawing two trumps 

 for one when the enemy have declared great strength in trumps : 

 (3) always declining to force the enemy; (1) putting off play by 

 which a sure trick will go to the enemy — though nothing can 

 prevent the trick so going, and it may be of es.-ential impor'ance to 

 throw the lead into his hand at the moment ; but there are many 

 other clever dodges which are sure ways to failure in the long run, 

 though they may turn out well perhaps five or six times in a score 

 of trials. 



But nothing shows the whist player better the value of sound 

 play than to play for a while with a partner who does not under- 

 stand the true principles of whist strategy, and puts trust in 

 unsound dodges. Especially, while as yet he is unaware of his 

 partner's foibles, does he suffer ; for with a partner of known 

 ineptitude he. of course, does not attempt the higher strategy, 

 knowing that his plans will inevitably be knocked on the head. 



Here is an example, which I will not put into tabular form, but 

 describe it as it presented itself — unpleasantly — to my attention. 



I was the original leader, and, on examining my hand, found that 

 it contained the following pleasing set of cards (the ace of spades 

 having been turned on my right) : — 



Sjiades— queen, ten. nine, four, three ; diamonds — king, queen, 

 knave, ten, eight ; hearts — ace ; and (•/«/'.«— king, nine. 



This was a charming hand to play, with a good partner, holding a 

 fair supporting hand. The object to be aimed at, of course, is to 

 bring in the long diamonds : and with five trumps, heart ace, and a 

 guarded king in clubs, this seems very likely to be brought off. 

 [The score was " One all."] Had I been free to look at my partner's 

 hand in this case, I should have made sure of bringing it off with 

 ease, unless he proved to tie a very weak player. Let us see what 

 happened : — 



t)i course I led a spade, the original fourth best trump ; a small 

 trump fell on my left; my partner played the knave; and the 

 trump card, the ace, took the trick. My right-hand opponent, Z, 

 led heart five ; my ace took the trick ; and four and three fell from 

 T and B, showing that two must be with Z ; and, of course, three 

 others, since he had led his fourth best. I now naturally led the 

 spade queen, the three high trumps left in my hand being now in 

 sequence. King took it on my right, my partner played a small 

 trump, and Z renounced. This renounce looked, of course, un- 

 favourable for my plans ; in fact, I could tell that Y either held two 

 more or three: if he only held two, however, I was s ill sure of 

 success in bringing in my diamonds, provided my partner played 

 rightly. Y returned his partner heart six (the lowest left, except 

 Z's two), my partner took the trick with the king, Z played the two, 

 and I discarded club nine. 



At this stage tlie game was won. Jly partner held another small 

 trump. We had already made two trices to the enemy's two. If 

 my partner led his trump I should have made two inore tricks, 

 extracting both Y''s ; have led diamond king, which Y would have 

 taken with tbe singleton ace he held ; and on his leading a heart 

 (his only reasonable lead, but it was indiff'erent what he held, as 

 my partner held club ace) I should have ruffed and made mv four 

 remaining diamonds, the last trick going to my partner's club ace. 

 We should thus have made four by tricks. 



But my partner deliberately committed the atrocity of forcinc 

 me (original trump leader though I was 1) by leading a heart, on 

 which Z put a little one, so that I had not even the satisfaction of 

 ruffing the best heart, yet was unable to resist the force, as I could 

 place two more hearts in Y"s hand, so that the force could be 

 repeated by him, and then by Z. (The inexperienced whist-player 

 may ask how I knew Y had two hearts left : simply because my 

 partner not leading the best, Z's play showed he knew Y could take 

 the trick, which at once made his return of the lowest at the fotirth 



trick indicate three hearts then in hand, for every good player 

 returns the lowest of three, the highest of two.) I therefore 

 ruffed, and now, play as I might, we could make only two by tricks. 

 I led my diamond king ; Y' took with the ace, and, forcing me in 

 hearts, remained with two trumps to my one. It I had taken out 

 both his trumps, and then led diamond king, he would have brought 

 in his part.ner's hearts, and we should have fared worse. If I had 

 taken out but one of his trumps and then played the diamond 

 king, he could have forced out my last trump with a heart, and on 

 ruflirg my diamond queen would have led his remaining heart. 



My partner's reason for his atrocious play was that he saw a 

 chance of giving me a ruff, and making one of his own trumps in 

 a ruff. For the chance of one trick (my rui", of course, was not a 

 trick gained) he — the weak hand — ruined (instead of helping) the 

 play of his strong-handed partner. 



It is because of such iniquities as these that Deschapelles said 

 good players of their own hand are detestable partners. 



From some statistics I have been collecting now for two or three 

 yeas 1 have been led to the conclusion that, while simply know- 

 nothing partners lose about one trick in ten, clever playtis of their 

 own hand lose about one trick in s^ven. 



LoNDOX Fogs. — Mr. Ernest Hart, of the Smoke Abatement 

 Institute, fears that London will always suffer from fogs, because 

 it is placed in a river valUy, on a clay soil, and is bordered on the 

 Essex side by low-lying lands very imperfectly drained, and on the 

 north side by the Harrow Weald. The fogs generated— the results 

 of damp exhalations — are greatly aggravated b3- the parks, most of 

 which require draining. But if the smoke is got rid of, the fogs 

 will be much less dense. 



d^ur CI)f£!si Column. 



By " Mephisto.'' 



MATCH, BLACKBUEN'E v. GCNSBERG. 

 The following games are the first four played in this match at 

 Bradford : — 



GAME I.— (Four Knights.) 



Notes by Messrs. Blackbcbne axd Guxsberg. 



(a) The usual continuation here is B to Kt5, as played in the late 

 Steinitz v. Zukertort match. 



(i) The game develops itself into a Philidor. 



(c) Mr. Blackburne now thinks PxP preferable. 



{d) P to B3 would have been better. 



(e) To prevent P to KB4. 



(/) It would not have been advisable to castle too early on the 

 Queen's side. 



(_g) Now \Mute is sufficiently developed to castle on the Queen's 

 side. 



(A) If Kt had taken B, Black would have had two weak spots on 

 KB3 and KE3. 



(!) If P moved to K5, White gets a strong attack by P to E6, 

 followed by Q to B3, .\:c 



(j) Kt X BP would also have been a strong continuation, leading 

 to a good many pretty variations, i.e., if 2."). Kt x BP, B x B, 

 26. Kt to KB. to be followed by Q x B, ic. 



(*) If P X P, White answers by P to E7, which would prove fatal 

 to Black. 



