JcLT 24, 1885.] 



KNOWLEDGE ♦ 



O^ur WBf)i&t Column. 



By "Five of Clubs."' 



THE AMERICAN LEADS. 



a noteworthy that much less is 

 .merican leads in America than 

 Jrleans, to whom these new prii 

 ns of former rules) are due, comm 

 ind there they have been under discm 



vn about the so-called 

 Dt'land. Mr. Trist, of 

 es (or rather these ex- 

 atcd them to the Field, 

 ivendish " and 



his school on the one hand, and on the other by "Mogul" 

 those who agree with him in regarding the modem system of play 

 as at once too complicated and too clear. In Xew York I found 

 few who knew anything about the American leads, and I waited 

 till I reached New Orleans and had the advantage of Mr. Trist's 

 own commentary on the new leads, before bringing them before 

 the readers of Knowledge. 



I have now fully examined the American leads, and have dis- 

 cussed them so far as was necessary, with Mr. Trist. I have even 

 gone so far, in my anxiety to get information from headciuarters, 

 as to do what usually I do not care to do, — playing Whist with 

 those not so fond of the game for the game's own sake as to play 

 it without such added piquancy as money stakes possess for the less 

 enthusiastic Whist brethren. 



It is of course known to all who play Whist at all that from a 

 suit of five cards not headed by such cards that a high card should 

 be led, the lowest but one is the right card to lead. This lead, 

 called the penultimate, has been extended to cases where there are 

 aix cards or more, in which case the lowest but two, or antepen- 

 ultimate, is led. Many Whist players must have recognised the 

 reasonableness of still further extending this principle, as by 

 leading the lowest but three from a suit of seven cards. I think 

 too that nearly every Whist player must have thought of the 

 advantage which would arise if some distinction were made between 

 the play from a suit of more than four and the play from a suit of 

 four only, in other cases than those already provided for. 



It is this want which Mr. Trist has met (and, as it seems to me, 

 has effectively met), by the suggestion of the principles which I 



ead the penultimate from five, or 

 e lead for the moment as it the 

 xistence. We make, for 



Tibe. 



Observe first that when ' 

 the antepenultimate from si: 

 cards below the one led, had 



the same lead from King, Nme, Siven, (Six, i'our, Three, or from 

 King, Nine, Seven, Six, Three, as we would from King, Nine, Seven, 

 Six alone. 



Now Mr. Trist proposes that in all cases where we hold more 

 than four, we should — wherever it is possible — lead and follow the 

 lead as if originally we had only held the four top cards of that 

 suit ; while, where this is not possible, he suggests a conventional 

 system by which information may still be conveyed as to the 

 original length of the suit. 



The cases where it is possible to lead as from a four-card suit 

 divide themselves into two classes : — 



First, where a low card would be led originally : here we lead the 

 fourth from the top according to the proposed system,— viz., the 

 lowest but one from five, the lowest but two from six, the lowest 

 but throe from seven, and so forth. 



SeconiUij, where a high card is led originally and followed 

 by a low card : here we lead the proper high card, and 

 follow with the original fourth card from the top. Thus 

 from Ace, Queen, Ten, Five, Four, we lead the Ace and follow 

 with the Five, instead of following with the Four as of old ; 

 from Ace, Queen, Ten, Five, Four, Three, we lead the Ace and follow 

 with Five, instead of Three ; and so forth. From King, Queen, Nine, 

 Seven, with or without smaller cards, we play, according to the new 

 system, King first and then Seven, instead of King first, and then 

 lowest, as was formerly the rule. 



The second class of cases is more important than the first, 

 where iiuleod every case had been already provided for, except 



is of tlie s( 



s the ne 



Mor 



have not fallen,— unless Z holds one of them, and played the Eight 

 intending to signal, but afterwards changed his mind and withdrew 

 the signal by playing the Ten. This last is very unlikely, nor does 

 it affect B'b power of placing the higher cards in A'a hand. A 

 certainly holds one of the two cards left below the Seven, and 

 almost certainly he holds both ; he also holds two of the three 

 cards — Queen, Knave, and Nine ; and the two must be either 

 Queen and Nine, or Knave and Nine ; for if he had held Queen and 

 Knave he would have led one of them second round. 



In the above case, only the knowledge accruing to B from 

 the use of the new system of leading is considered ; not any 

 possible effect on B's play. Suppose, however,— to take a con- 

 venient illustration of the effect of the proposed system, that, 

 besides the Four and the King, B holds the Knave. Then, it is 

 obvious that he is at once guided by the lead of the Seven to his 

 proper course as third player second round. He knows that A 

 holds the Queen and the Nine— of which fact (be it observed) he 

 would have remained in ignorance had A led his lowest, second 

 round. Therefore, if he plays the Knave he will block his 

 partner's suit. He therefore plays his King, that his partner's 

 suit may be cleared. Of course this would be his right play, any- 

 how ; for the finesse of the Knave would clearly be unjustifiable. 

 Bat in the following case B's play is modified by the knowledge 

 which his partner's play conveys (B holds Knave, Five, and 

 Four) ;— 



1. HA 



r 



H2 

 HK 



H4 H8 



HKn HQ 



Here B places in ^'s hand two cards between the Ace and the 

 Seven, which after Vs play (bat before Z's) must be either 

 Queen, Ten, or Queen, Nine, or Ten, Nine. If A holds the 

 Queen it matters not how B plays; but if A holds the Ten, 

 Nine, B can only do harm by retaining the Knave. Whether 

 the Queen falls from Z or not, B'a Knave can do no good; but 

 if the Queen should lie with Z then the third round falls to the 

 Knave, if B keeps it and A's suit is blocked. 



Take again another case. 



. S7 



S K Lowest Trum 



doubt a 

 would h 



i case B safely ruffs with his lowest trump instead of 

 because he knows that ^1 only holds two cards above 

 which mnst be the Eight and the Nine; were it not 



ise of the " card of uniformity " B would have been in 

 to the position of the Knave, and his proper course 



ive been to trump with his best. 



(To be i 



lued.) 



A TvEo's Trick. Few things show Whist weakness and inexperi- 

 ence more than boasting of approaching success when sitting 

 down to play, or claiming success, after it has been achieved, as 

 evidence of superior skill. For every one who has learned any- 

 thing of Whist knows that though superior skill mnst assure a 

 balance of superior success in the course of a great many rubbers, 

 the odds are very slight in favour of the most skilful players against 

 the veriest blunderers at a single sitting. One of the finest players 

 living lost 23 rubbers in succession, though most of the time he had 

 an excellent partner. When you hear any one say, If you played 

 with our club, you would lose money, you may be sure he knows 

 nothing of the game ; yet it would not be safe to infer that all or 

 most of the members of his club are poor players. 



WnisT Criticism.— When a man criticises another as a bad 

 Whist ])layer, without saying why he thinks so, it is well (if yon 

 wish to get at the truth) to ask him for liis reasons. On sundry 

 occasions I have elicited the follinv:- : i-ons " for 

 such general condemnation; — (i.) 1! t her day, 

 third in hand, though he held the A, . K.ng from 

 Aoe, King, and others, (ill.) Hoi ■ _', Qneen. 

 I had 



I He 



ivith 



