January 1, 1887.] 



♦ KNO^WLEDGE ♦ 



71 



(!Fur WBWt Columiu 



By "Five of Clubs." 



MATHEWS OX WHIST, 



{Continued from page 22.) 



EFORE you play a card, sort your hand carefully, 

 look at the trump card, and consider the score of 

 the game and strength of your hand. Form 

 yoar plan on ihe probable situation of the cards, 

 being prepared, however, to change the plan 

 should anything fall to indicate a different one. 

 After deciding on your plan, never look at your 

 hand till it is your turn to play. Without atten- 

 tion to the board, no maxims in practice can 

 ever make a tolerable whist-player. 



Never lead a card without a reason. It is better to have a wrong 

 reason than to fall into a habit of playing at random. 



At the commencement of a game, if you have a good hand, or if 

 your adversaries are considerably advanced in the score, play a bold 

 game : otherwise a more cautious one. [This rule requires some 

 moditication. If you have a good hand and you and your partner 

 are considerably advanced in the score, it is better to play a 

 cautious game, because the object of a bold game is to get many 

 tricks, and you want but few — on the supposition — to win. Again, 

 if you have a poor hand, and your adversaries are considerably 

 advanced in the score, your first object should be to save the game, 

 which requires cautious play, directed rather to securing the odd 

 tiick, or so many tricks as may be necessary to prevent the enemy 

 going out, than to secure a winnirg game. The rule should rather 

 run, then — If the enemy are well advanced in the score, and you 

 have a good hand, so that there is little danger of losing, play a 

 bold game ; but if your hand is bad and the enemy well advanced, 

 play more cautiously. This I imagine is what JIathews really 

 meant, as otherwise his rule as a whole (with its perplexing " if 

 otherwise") is altogether misleading and barely intelligible.] 



The best leads are from sequences of three cards or more. If you 

 have none lead [in general] from your most numerous suit. It is 

 seldom right to lead from a suit in which you have a tenace. With 

 Ace, Queen, &c., of one suit. King, Knave, Sec, of a second, and the 

 third a weak one, the best play is to lead from the last. [This is no 

 longer the opinion of the most experienced whist-players, who under 

 such circumstances would lead a small card from the lowest suit, or 

 the Ace if holding five in that suit.] If strong in trumps, lead 

 rather from a suit heads d by a King than a Queen. But with three 

 or four small trumps, I should prefer leading from a single card to 

 opening a long weak suit. 



It is hardly necessary to point out that while the old school seldom 

 led a singleton, except with length in trumps, regarding it as a 

 dangerous lead, the modern school objects to the singleton lead 

 under nearly all cii'cumstances. But the modern school would be 

 more in sympathy with JIathews than with the old school, for 

 Mathews's idea clearly is that with a few small trumps and a bad 

 hand you can lose nothing by ruffing if you get the chance, and 

 may make a trick or two, or possibly find your partner able to join 

 in a cross-ruff. The chief danger, that which has practically divided 

 the modern school against the singleton lead, even uniler these com- 

 ■paratively favourable conditions, is this — the chances when you are 

 weak in trumps and in hand are that the enemy's combined strength 

 surpasses your partner's, both in trumps and in the suit in which you 

 hold a singltton ; if this be the case, your singleton lead shows them 

 just what to do to make a long scire. They extract trumps, use the 

 suit in which they have length and strength effectively against you 

 and your partner, and probably render any other good cards he may 

 have in otlier suits useless to him, while you are powerless to help 

 him. By keeping back your singleton, you keep back also the 

 knowledge necessary to put them in the way of thus using their 

 strength for your destruction. 



Another ca^c in which Mathews considers that you may lead a 

 singleton seems less obviously objectionable. 



As I have ventured to recommend occasional deviations from what 

 is considered one of the classic maxims, advising the lead from a 

 single card without that strength in trumps hitherto [he refers, of 

 course, to the oldest of old schools] judged indispensable to justify 

 it, I give the reasons that influence my opinion in favour of this 

 practice, with those generally alleged against it, lea\ing the reader 

 to determine between them. Two objections are made, which, it 

 cannot be denied, may be, and are at times, justified by the event. 

 The first is that, if your partner has the King of the suit guarded, 

 and the Ace behind it, he loses it ; which would not be the case if 



the lead came from the adversary. The second and most material 

 is, that your partner, if he wins the trick, may lead out trumps, on 

 the supposition that it is your strong suit ; or the adversaries may 

 lead out trumps, suspecting your purpose. On the other hand, the 

 constant and certain advantages are the preservation of the tenace 

 in the two other salts— which I suppose you to have [this, however, 

 was not what his prior advice as worded would have suggested] — 

 and the probable one of making your small trumps, which you would 

 not otherwise do. If the leader has four small trumps ; Ace, Queen, 

 &c., of the second suit ; King, Knave, sc<:., of a third ; and a single 

 card of the fourth, I am of opinion that the chance of winning by 

 leading the single card is much greater than that of losing tricks ; 

 and I appeal to those who are in the habit of attending whist-tables 

 whether they do not frequently see the players who proceed more 

 exactly according to the maxims of Hojle. Sec, after losing the 

 game, try to demonstrate that this ought not to have happened, and 

 that they have been vanquished by the bad, not by the good, play of 

 their adversaries. I do not recommend, in general, leading from 

 single cards, unless very strong in trumps ; but, with such cards as 

 I have mentioned, I am convinced it may occasionally be done with 

 very great, though not with certain, advantage. 



Of course the case here considered is very different from that 

 which had before been mentioned. It may be admitted that the 

 singleton lead from such a hand would be safe, or even in playing 

 for the odd trick, good policy. The fault of the play would resids 

 not in its undue darina', but in its undue caution. With such a 

 hand a trump lead would be the best. You have necessarily a long 

 suit, if not two, and both well guarded. Should your partner not 

 be strong in trumps, or well guarded in your singleton suit, you 

 remain with three, or at the least with two, trumps wherewith to 

 ruff the singleton suit — and you have all the better chance of doing 

 this, that the enemy, noting your trump lead, will not be anxious 

 to extract trumps. But the chances are that either your partner 

 has strength in trumps, or he has at least some strength in j'our 

 short suit ; in either case your lead is a safe one. Should he have 

 any strength in trumps, and two rounds be taken out, you and he 

 have an excellent chance of making a good score. 



[We shall see presently under what conditions Mathews recom- 

 mends the trump lead; but now pass on to consider his detailed 

 advice in regard to the leads.] 



With Ace, King, Knave, and three small trumps, play out the 

 Ace and King ; but with only two small trumps, play the King, 

 and wait for the finesse of the Knave. In other suits, without 

 great strength in trumps, or with the chance of making a particular 

 point [if the finesse is successful] do not wait lor the finesse. 

 [Mathews here, and in the next rule, advises the Ace lead first, 

 as a general rule — for the lead of the King is only authorised by 

 him when you propose to wait for the finesse, and when, therefore, 

 it is necessary to show j-our partner you hold the leading card, 

 and wish the suit led to you. He evidently considers that in 

 plain suits, when you do not wish the suit returned, it is better 

 to lead the Ace first.] 



With Ace, King, and five others, lead the Ace in all suits ; but 

 with four or less, lead the lowest in trumps. [The rule is only 

 changed in our time, in that the King is played from the head 

 sequence in the former case, and the fourth best, or penultimate, in 

 the latter, except by the staunch opponents of penultimate and 

 American leads. We still adopt the point of strategy, leading a 

 small card from Ace, King, and fewer than five small cards in 

 trumps.] 



With Ace, Queen, Knave, Sec, lead the Ace in all suits. With 

 Ace, Queen, ten, and others, in trumps lead a small one ; but in 

 plain suits, with Ace, Queen, ten, and two others, lead the Ace 

 unless very strong in trumps. [.Mathews so words the rule as to 

 leave it in doubt whether he means in the last case Ace, Queen, ten, 

 and three others, or Ace, Queen, and three small ones. Probably 

 his rule was tlie same as ours — Ace first from Ace, Queen, and three 

 small ones ; only he notes the exception, which mo.st of our modem 

 books fail to mention, that with great strength in trumps you 

 should lead a small card in the plain suit, whether you open the 

 plain suit first or after taking out a round or two in trumps.] 



With Ace, Knave, and small ones, lead the lowest in trumps. 

 In other suits, with Ace, Knave, and more than two small ones, lead 

 the Ace, unless very strong in tramps. [Sound advice, both as to 

 rule and exception. It is clear my reading of the preceding rule is 

 correct.] 



With Ace and four small ones, lead the lowest in trumps ; the 

 Ace in plain suits, unless you are very strong in trumps. [With Ace 

 and five small ones, lead a small cird in tramps ; but with six small 

 cards, lead the Ace.] 



{To be continued.) 



