41 C 



♦ KNOWLEDGE - 



[Maacu 10, 1882. 



<^ur ^\\)i^t Column. 



Hy 



I'lVK OK Ci.i; 



J I I MiTINfiTON.— Tho law ngaiiint revoking, like moHt of 



, 1 i thosp which involve ponaltieii, is intended to prevent 

 plojerg, either tliroiigh carelessneHB ur olhvririnr, from doinj; nnj- 

 thing by which tliey might obtain a wrongful advantage. Wilfully 

 revoking would be cheating, were there no penalty; it is none the 

 lo»8 cheating when it is done with tho hope of cucuping the |ienalty, 

 or to hide a former honest revoke. Tho penalty for wilful revokes 

 is exclusion from tho society of honest card-players. 



FiVK oy Clubs. 



Pbobiem 2. — An easy Double-Dummy Problem. 

 Colonel Dniysou gives tho following anuising example (which 

 occurred to himself at double dummy) of tho differonco between 

 practical and theoretical Whist. As he says, if any player had 

 ployed at Whist as it is necessary to play in tho following case, ho 

 would probably have been accused of trying to lose the garao : — 



A. 

 H«ar(«— 10, 6, 1. 

 Spades — A. 



Clubs— a,:k, Q. 



Diamonds — 10, 7 

 •1,3. 



The Hands. 



0,5, 



B. 

 Hearts— 6, 3, 2. 

 Spades— 9 8, 5, 3, 2 

 Clubs— None. 

 Diamonds— A, Q, Kn, 9, 8, 

 S 



Hearts— A, K, Q, Kn. 

 Spades— K, 10, 7, 4. 

 Clubs— 10, 7, 4. 

 Diamonds— K, 2. 



Z. 

 Hearts— 0, 8, 7. 

 Spades— Q, Kn, 6. 

 Clubs— Kn, 9, 8, 6, 5, 



3, 2. 

 Diamonds — None. 



A,Bi; Y,Z, love. 

 Y Z to save (and win) the game. 



Next week an interesting game, kindly sent us by Mr. F. II. 

 Lewis, will appear, illustrating the use of the penultimate as a 

 means of conveying information to partner. 



Sir, — As "Five of Clubs " says that playing Knavo second hand 

 from Knave two, a small card having been led, would not be signal- 

 ling for trumps, and that Clay says so, whereas I nr^iod that, for 

 all the third player could tell, the second |)layer might be asking, 

 and, as "Five of Clubs" has, I am convinced, somewhat misunder- 

 stood Clay's meaning, allow mc, on a point of such frequent 

 occurrence, and in which so many go astray, to justify my comment 

 and elucidate the position. On referring to Clay, your readers will 

 note that he is impressing the fact that to ask for trumps a player 

 mn^t throw away an unnecessarily high card, and he illustrates 

 this by an example of his partner playing a ten second hand on a 

 small card led, and afterwards playing a small card, whereon 

 Clay says, " lie thinks he has asked for trumps, but he has done 

 no such thing. His ten is not, so far as I can tell, an unneces- 

 sarily high card. It is an effort to take the trick. It may 

 be played in the ordinary way from Knavo, ten, and a small 

 card of the suit." Clay's meaning clearly is, that inasmuch as tho 

 ten may have been played from Knave, ten, and a small one, and 

 would in that case not have been an unnecessarily high card, tho 

 play of the ten, and then a small one, is not per se asking for 

 trumps. And ho clearly implies that if ho knew or could infer that 

 his partner did not hold the Knave, ho would have regarded it as 

 asking for trumps ; for remember that he expressly lays it down 

 that, with Knave orten and one small card second hand, tho small 

 card is to be played, unless to cover ; so that, in his opinion, holding 

 ten, or Knave, and a small one .>;econd hand, and playing ten or 

 Knavo on a small one, would be an unnecessarily high card, and 

 that is the test. Cavendish's language on this point is not liable to 

 tho same misinterpretation as Clay's. Ho says, "It is important 

 to distinguish between covering second hand and discarding an un- 

 necessarily high card. For example, with Knave, ten, and a small one, 

 it is usual to play tho ten second hand on a small card. When the 

 small card is played tho second round, it is not a signal for trumps, 

 unless your partner can infer that you do not hold the Knavo." So 

 equally and by parity of reasoning, a player holding Knavo and 

 a small ono can by ploying the Knavo second hand, when a small 

 one is led, ask for trumps, but it will not be a signal to his partner 

 unless his partner himself holds tho Queen, or can infer that it 

 is in the hands of either adversary. And this, accordiag to my 

 experience, is the view adopted in play by Cavendish au<l oilier lino 

 players. I therefore submit tkat in Problem 1 B (third player) 



could not bo rare that }', who played tho Knavo second hand and 

 must hold tho two, won not asking for trumps. 



On tho other matters at issue lictweon myself and " Five of 

 Clubs," I will only say that some expressions in his letter to yon, 

 Mr. Kditor, give inaccurate imprcsaiuns of tho content* of mj 

 lotter, for whicli you could not find spoce. MocfL. 



If our whist readers consider a few sontences prccedinj? those 

 quoted by " Mogul" from Cloy, and a few which follow, tin . -.vill 

 sec, we think, that Cloy, at any rate (rightly or wrongly), tli . ii/ht 

 I ho piny of ten followed by small ono (with these two ciirds :iloao 

 in hand) an unsatisfactorj- way of signalling. Tho passage runs: — 

 " Aly partner is sccmd to play, and holdji, saij, the ten and a gmall 

 card n/ the tuit, which the adversary opens with a small card. My 

 partner being second player, plays his ten, and tho trick is taken 

 with the King ; the load is returned, and tho original leader takes 

 with the Ace, my portner throwing his small card." He thinks, 

 &c., as quoted by "Mogul," "He could only liave given, in this 

 way, a legitimate invitation for a trump, if tho card originally held 

 hod been higher than the t«n, which, in this case, would have been 

 an unnecessarily high card." 



It seems to me clear that Clay, with his (perhaps exaggerated) 

 abhorrence of small cards, here teaches that if you hold ten and a 

 small one second hand, you should not, even though yon desire to 

 signal, use these cards for the purpose, lest your partner (not holding 

 Knave or having any means of placing it clsewliere), should infer 

 that it remains in your hand, unguarded. Of course, every whist 

 player knows that with Queen and one other, or Knave and one 

 other, or ten and one other, the small card should be played. Every 

 whist player also is familiar with Cavendish's explanation (given in 

 almost identical terms by Pole also) that with Queen, Knave, and 

 small one, or Knave, ten, and a small one, the highest of the sequence 

 should be played first if you want to signal. But that I take it i« 

 a different point, not, as Mogul opines, the same. Cavendish is 

 speaking of a case where second hand holds three. Clay of a case 

 where he holds only two. However, Problem 1 was not mine, but 

 taken, as stated, from the Wesfmitister Papers.— Fixe of Clcbs. 



And this leads me to note that many querists seem nnable to 

 understand how Z could know from T's play in the ninth and tenth 

 rounds of the game in No. 13, p. 284, that Y held tho Knave. I was 

 Z, Ts partner, and I knew it ; the " proof of the pudding," ic. Let 

 mc explain how I knew it— at once, without having to think over the 

 matter. T usually played strictly in accordance with the familiar 

 rules, always " following " with lowest of a sequence, unless there was 

 special occasion to depart from the rule. In this case he manifestly had 

 not played tho lowest, for after the ten fell the nine. I knew he 

 would never have played ten before nine, from the sequence ten, 

 nine only. I was absolutely certain, therefore, that he held the 

 Knave. It was the only way in which he could have shown it. He 

 was bound to play one of the sequence ; the small card would have 

 lost a trick aud the game. If he played nine, then ten, I should 

 have knovm nothing about the Knave ; if he had played nine, then 

 Knave, I should have known nothing about the ten, or rather 1 

 should have supposed ten -with the adversary. If he had played 

 ten then Knave, or Knave then ten, I should have supposed the 

 nine with the adversary. By plaving ten, then nine, he showed mc 

 the position of the tliird card of the sequence. My own play of 

 tho King first was decidedly wrong, though, of com-se, strictly in 

 accordance mth rule. I felt this the moment I had played it ; 

 who has not made such mistakes ? But it seemed to me at the 

 time that Y hit on a very ingenious course to show mo ho held the 

 three sequence, by departing from tho customary rule and playing 

 the middle card. Of course, if he had not been a steady player, 

 I might have supposed the play of ten followed by nine a mere 

 piece of carelessness ; but I felt certain it was not. 



Five of Clcbs. 



j!^oric:Es. 



The Buck Numbers of Khowlkdob, with the eieeption of No. 2 (Nor. II, 1981), 

 No. 3 (Nov. 18, 1381), and No. 6 (ohtninablo only by taking Part IT). ire in prinl. 

 and can be obtained from all booksellers and newsagents, or direct from the 

 Publishers. Should any difTjculty arise in obtaining the paper, an applicatioo to 

 the Publishers is respectfully requested. 



The following Monthly Parts of Kxowi-IDQB are now to be had (Part I. htini 

 out of prinl) : — 



Pabt 11.— (Dec., 1881.) Containing five numbers. Price Is. Post-free, Is. Sd. 

 Paiit III.— (Jan., 1882.) Containing four numbers. Price lOd. Post-free, !«. 

 Part IV.— (Feb., 18j2.) Containing four numbers. Price lOd. Post-free, la. 



Subscribers wishing to complete their Sets are advised to make early applicatioa 

 to the Publishers, as no further reprints will be ordered. 



Special Noticb to ora Rbadkrs.— Threepence each willj>e"paid by the Pnb- 

 blishcra for copies of Nos. 2, 3, and 6. Apply or address; Wynian i .Songfti, 

 Great Queen Street, London, W.C. 



OFFICE: 74 & 75, GUEAT QUEEN STREET, LONDON, W.C. 



