PART I.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES.

INTRODUCTORY.

Before entering on an analysis of the general principles of the Game of Whist, it is advisable to explain shortly on what foundation these principles rest; for it might be supposed that a demonstration of the propositions contained in these pages is about to be offered; that the chances for and against all possible systems of play have been calculated; and that the one here upheld can be proved to be certainly right, and all others certainly wrong. Such a view would be altogether erroneous. The problem is far too intricate to admit of being treated with mathematical precision. The conclusion that the chances are in favour of a certain line of play is not arrived at by abstract calculation, but by general reasoning, confirmed by the accumulated experience of practised players. The student must not, therefore, expect absolute proof. He must frequently be satisfied if the reasons given appear weighty in themselves, and none weightier can be suggested on the other side; and also with the assurance that the method of play recommended in this work is for the most part that which, having stood the test of time, is generally adopted.

THE FIRST HAND OR LEAD.

The considerations that determine the most advantageous card to lead at the commencement of a hand differ from those which regulate the lead at other periods; for, at starting, the Doctrine of Probabilities is the only guide; while, as the hand advances, each player is able, with more or less certainty, to draw inferences as to the position of some of the remaining cards. The number of the inferences, and the certainty with which they can be drawn from the previous play, constantly increase; hence it not unfrequently happens that, towards the termination of a hand, the position of every material card is known.

In treating of the lead, it will be most convenient to begin by examining the principles which govern the original lead. The application of these principles will require to be somewhat modified in the case of trumps, as will appear hereafter.

1. LEAD ORIGINALLY FROM YOUR STRONGEST SUIT.

The first question that arises is, Which is the strongest suit? A suit may be strong in two distinct ways. 1. It may contain more than its proportion of _high_ cards. For example, it may contain two or more honours--one honour in each suit being the average for each hand. 2. It may consist of more than the average _number_ of cards, in which case it is a numerically strong or long suit. Thus a suit of four cards has numerical strength; a suit of five cards great numerical strength. On the other hand a suit of three cards is numerically weak.

In selecting a suit for the lead, numerical strength is the principal point to look to; for it must be borne in mind that aces and kings are not the only cards which make tricks; twos and threes may become quite as valuable when the suit is _established_--_i.e._, when the higher cards of the suit are exhausted. To obtain for your own small cards a value that does not intrinsically belong to them, and to prevent the adversary from obtaining it for his, is evidently an advantage. Both these ends are advanced by choosing for your original lead the suit in which you have the greatest numerical strength; for you may establish a suit of this description, while, owing to your strength, it is precisely the suit which the adversary has the smallest chance of establishing against you. A suit that is numerically weak, though otherwise strong, is far less eligible.

Suppose, for example, you have five cards headed by (say) a ten in one suit, and ace, king, and one other (say the two) in another suit. If you lead from the ace, king, two suit, all your power is exhausted as soon as you have parted with the ace and king, and you have given the holder of numerical strength a capital chance of establishing the suit. It is true that this fortunate person _may_ be your partner; but it is twice as likely that he is your adversary, since you have two adversaries and only one partner. On the other hand, if you lead from the five suit, though your chance of establishing it is slight, you, at all events, avoid assisting your adversary to establish his; the ace and king of your three suit, still remaining in your hand, enable you to prevent the establishment of that suit, and may procure you the lead at an advanced period of the hand. This we shall find as we proceed is a great advantage, especially if, in the course of play, you are left with all the unplayed cards, or _long cards_, of your five suit.

The best suit of all to lead from is, of course, one which combines both elements of strength.

In opening a suit, there is always the danger of finding your partner very weak, or of leading up to a _tenace_ (_i.e._, the best and third best cards, or the second best guarded) in the hand of the fourth player. If you lead from a very strong suit, these dangers are more than compensated for by the advantages just explained; if your best suit is only moderately strong, the lead is not profitable, but rather the reverse. If all your suits are weak, the lead is very disadvantageous. The hand, however weak, must hold one suit of four at least, and this, if only headed by a ten or a nine, should generally be chosen. Being unable to strike the adversary, you take the best chance of not assisting him.

It follows that a suit consisting of a single card is a very disadvantageous one to lead from; yet no lead is more common, even among players of some experience. The reason assigned in favour of this lead is the possibility of making small trumps. But it is important to observe, that you stand very nearly as good a chance of making trumps by waiting for some one else to open the suit. If the suit is opened by the strong hand, your barrenness will not be suspected; you will be able, if necessary, to win the second round, while you will be free from the guilt of having sacrificed any high card your partner may have possessed in the suit, or of having assisted in establishing a suit for the adversary. Again, your partner, if strong in trumps, will very likely draw yours, and then return your lead, imagining you led from strength. If, indeed, he is a shrewd player, he will, after being taken in once or twice, accommodate his game to yours; but he can never be sure of the character of your lead, and may often miss a great game by not being able to depend upon you. If you have great numerical strength in trumps, the evils of a single-card lead are lessened; but in this case, as will hereafter be shown, it is generally right to lead trumps. In the opinion of the author, it may be laid down as an axiom, that in plain suits (_i.e._, in suits not trumps) the original lead of a single card is in no case defensible.

Many players will not lead from a strong suit if headed by a tenace; preferring, for instance, to lead from ten, nine, three, to ace, queen, four, two. They argue, that by holding up the ace, queen suit, they stand a better chance of catching the king. So far they are right; but they purchase this advantage too dearly; for the probable loss from leading the weak suit may be taken as greater than the probable gain from holding up the tenace.

_Which card of the strong suit should be led originally?_--The key to this problem is furnished by the remark, that it conduces to the ultimate establishment of a suit to keep the high or commanding cards of it in the hand that has numerical strength. In the suit of your own choosing, you are presumably stronger than your partner; it is therefore undesirable at once to part with your high cards. Hence it is best, in general, to lead the smallest. Your partner, actuated by a desire to assist in establishing your strong suit, will play his highest card to your lead (_see_ Play of Third Hand, p. 92), and, if he fails to win the trick, will, at all events, force a higher card from the fourth player, and so help to clear the suit for you. Another reason in favour of leading the lowest is, that it increases your chance of making tricks in the first two rounds. For in the first round of a suit the second hand generally puts on his smallest card, as will be seen hereafter. If, therefore, you originally lead the smallest, holding ace and others, the first trick will, in all probability, lie between your partner and the last player; and since there is no reason why the fourth player should hold a better card than the third, it is nearly an even chance that your partner wins the trick. It is certain (bar trumping) that you win the second round; therefore, if the suit is led this way, it is about an even chance that you make the first two tricks. But if you lead out the ace first, it is two to one against your making the second trick, for the adversaries have two hands against your partner's one, and either may hold the king. A third reason for leading the lowest of your suit is, that your partner may prove utterly weak in it; and in this case it is important that you keep a commanding card, to stop the adversary from establishing it.

It follows, when you lead a small card originally, that your partner should conclude you have led from numerical strength.

There are three exceptions to the rule of originally leading the lowest of a strong suit.--1. When you lead from ace with four or more small ones. In this case it is considered best to begin with the ace, lest it should be trumped on the second round. 2. When your suit contains a strong sequence, it is best to lead one of the sequence, in order to prevent the adversaries from winning the first trick with a very small card. 3. When you lead from a suit of more than four cards (not headed by ace and not containing a strong sequence), the fourth-best card is led, for reasons to be afterwards explained. (_See_ Appendix A, pp. 281-6.)

When you intend to lead from a sequence, the card to be selected depends on the nature of the sequence, namely, whether it is a _head_ sequence or an _under_ sequence. By a head sequence is meant a sequence of the highest cards of your suit, _i.e._, of the cards heading your suit; thus, such a suit as queen, knave ten, six, contains a head sequence of queen, knave, ten. Sequences that do not head your suit are under sequences; thus ace, queen, knave, ten, is an example of an under sequence of queen, knave, ten. You should--

2. LEAD THE HIGHEST OF A HEAD SEQUENCE

(_Except as specified in the Analysis of Leads, pp. 64-71_).

For, otherwise, your partner is uncertain where the highest lies, and you and he may play two winning cards where one would have sufficed. For instance, if, with queen, knave, ten, you lead the ten, your partner may put the king on it, but he certainly would not on the queen. In addition to this, if there is any _finessing_ to be done in the suit, it can only be by your partner. By finessing is meant playing an inferior card though holding a higher one of the suit, not in sequence with the card played. Thus, to continue the illustration of the sequence of queen, knave, ten. You lead the queen. Your partner has the ace and others. He will not put it on, but will finesse by playing his smallest card; and if the king lies to your left, that card is completely hemmed in. Had you led the ten, your partner would have put on the ace, and the king have been freed.

On the other hand, if you lead from an under sequence, you should lead the lowest, the reason being that, in this case, you wish your partner to put on his highest card. For example, with king, ten, nine, eight, you should lead the eight and not the ten, as if your partner's highest card is the knave, you wish him to put it on that he may not afterwards block your suit by retaining a commanding card of it. Or, suppose your partner's best card is the queen, the lead of the ten would probably induce him to finesse, and thus give the adversary a chance of making the knave the first round, and of retaining the ace in hand, although you and your partner hold two honours in the suit. If your partner puts on the queen, you are still able to finesse the nine when the suit is returned, and this is much more advantageous than your partner's passing the ten. In the first place, the finesse is postponed to the second round, when, more cards having been played, you have more data to guide you as to the policy of making the finesse; and, in the next place, if you have a choice as to whether you or your partner shall finesse in your strong suit, it is, as a rule, more advantageous for you to do it. For, as already explained, it conduces to the establishment of a suit for the strong hand to retain the command of it, and for the presumably weak hand to play his highest cards.

With sequences neither at the top nor at the bottom of a suit (_intermediate_ sequences), the card to lead is the lowest of the intermediate sequence.

Players who adopt American Leads will, however, select the fourth-best card when leading a low card from suits of more than four cards, whether or not the suit contains an under sequence, or an intermediate sequence (with the sole exception of ten, led from king, knave, ten, and small). Thus, from king, knave, ten, nine, whether accompanied by the eight or by smaller cards, they lead the nine; and so on for other combinations. (_See_ Appendix A, pp. 281-6).

ANALYSIS OF LEADS IN DETAIL.

(_See_ also Appendix A, pp. 281-6, and Appendix C, pp. 289-94.)

[The following analysis should be familiarly known by every player, not only that he himself may follow it, but also that he may form a correct idea of the cards the other players hold, by observing what they lead.]

_Ace, king, queen, knave (in trumps)._

Lead knave, then ace.

With more than four in suit, lead queen after ace.

With only four in suit, lead king after ace.

_Ace, king, queen, knave (in plain suits)._

Lead king, then knave.

With more than four in suit, lead queen after knave.

With only four in suit, lead ace after knave.

_Ace, king, queen, with or without small ones (in trumps)._

Lead queen.

With more than four in suit, lead king after queen.

With only four or three in suit, lead ace after queen.

_Ace, king, queen, with or without small ones (in plain suits)._

Lead king, then queen.

_Ace, king, knave, &c._

Lead king, then ace.

Sometimes it is right, more especially in trumps, to lead king, then to change the suit, and to finesse the knave on the return, particularly if queen is turned up to your right. With more than five trumps it is seldom advisable to wait for the finesse. No positive rule can be laid down, either for trumps or plain suits.

_Ace, king, and small (in trumps)._

Lead king, then ace, if you have at least five small ones. Otherwise, lead a small one (the fourth-best if an American Leader).

_Ace, king, and small (in plain suits)._

Lead king, then ace.

King is led before ace to inform your partner that you hold the winning card of your suit, in case you should think fit to change the suit, or in case the fourth player should have none of it. If your partner has none, he should not trump, for, even if you do not hold the ace, you want the adversary to play it, that he may not retain the winning card of your suit.

When opening a plain suit, headed by ace, king, _after having been forced_ to trump, lead the ace first. If you begin with the king, and your partner happens to have none of the suit, he might trump the king, in order to lead again the suit you have already trumped.

If intermediate cards fall and you remain with the command and the next best, you inform your partner of the fact by continuing with the next best. Thus:--You lead king from ace, king, knave, etc. To the king, your partner drops the queen. You should next lead the knave.

_Ace, queen, knave, ten, with or without others._

Lead ace, then ten, even though one of your others is the nine.

With more than four in suit, lead knave after ten.

With only four in suit, lead queen after ten.

_Ace, queen, knave, and small._

Lead ace.

With more than four in suit, lead knave after ace.

With only four in suit, lead queen after ace.

_Ace, queen, ten, &c. (in trumps)._

If knave is turned up to your right, lead queen.

_Ace and small ones (in trumps)._

Lead ace, if you have seven in suit, and then a small one (the original fourth-best if an American Leader).

Lead a small one (the fourth-best if an American Leader), with less than seven in suit.

Obvious variations, taking into account the trump card, are omitted. It is assumed, _e.g._, that, if your partner has turned up the king, you would lead a small one from ace, queen, knave, &c., or from ace and any number of small cards.

_Ace and small ones (in plain suits)._

Lead ace, with five or more in suit.

Lead a small one after ace (the original fourth-best if an American Leader).

Lead lowest, with only four in suit, the cards being of a lower denomination than in the leads already enumerated.

_King, queen, knave, ten, with or without others._

Lead ten, even though one of your others is the nine.

(_a._) If ten wins the trick:--

With more than five in suit, lead knave after ten.

With five in suit, lead queen after ten.

With only four in suit, lead king after ten.

(_b._) If ten forces ace:--

With more than four in suit, lead knave after ten.

With only four in suit, lead queen after ten.

The common practice is (or was) to lead queen after ten, in all cases, to inform your partner that the lead was from king, queen, knave, ten, and not from king, knave, ten. But, if the ten wins the trick, the mere fact of continuing with a high card informs your partner that the lead was from king, queen, knave, ten; for, with the only other combination from which ten is first led, (viz., king, knave, ten), if the ten wins, the next lead is a small card.

If the ten forces the ace, and your partner can give you credit for not leading a losing card when you hold a winning one, he is informed, by the second lead of any high card but the king, that you led from king, queen, knave, ten. Therefore, queen and knave are high indifferent cards, and you select the knave to show five or more originally; the queen to show four exactly (_see_ Appendix A).

_King, queen, knave, and more than one small._

Lead knave.

With more than five in suit, lead queen after knave.

With only five in suit, lead king after knave.

_King, queen, knave, and one small one._

Lead king, then knave.

If the king wins the first trick it is not safe to go on with a small one, ace being sometimes held up by the adversary, especially in trumps.

_King, queen, and small ones (in trumps.)_

Lead king, if you have seven in suit, or if one of your small ones is the ten.

Lead a small one (the fourth-best if an American Leader), with less than seven trumps, and not holding the ten.

If king is led, and it wins, after king lead a small one (the original fourth-best if an American Leader).

_King, queen, and small ones (in plain suits)._

Lead king.

If the king wins, after king lead a small one (the original fourth-best if an American Leader).

_King, knave, ten, nine, with or without small ones._

Lead nine, even though you also hold the eight.

(_a._) If nine wins the trick:--

With more than four in suit, lead ten after nine.

With only four in suit, lead knave after nine.

(_b._) If nine forces queen, or both queen and ace:--

With more than five in suit, lead ten after nine.

With five in suit, lead knave after nine.

With only four in suit, lead king after nine.

(_c._) If nine forces ace, but not queen, king must be led after nine. Then (third lead),

With more than four in suit originally, lead ten after king.

With only four in suit, lead knave after king.

_King, knave, ten, with one or more small ones._

Lead ten.

If the ten wins the trick, lead a small one after ten (the original fourth-best if an American Leader).

If the ten forces the queen, or both queen and ace:

With more than four in suit lead knave after ten.

With four in suit, lead king after ten.

If the ten forces the ace, and not the queen, king must be led after ten.

_King, knave, nine, &c. (in trumps)._

If ten is turned up to your right, lead knave.

_King and small ones._

From all strong suits headed by king, other than those already enumerated, lead a small one (the fourth-best if an American Leader).

_Queen, knave, ten, nine, with or without others._

Lead queen, then nine, even though one of your others is the eight.

With more than four in suit, lead ten after nine.

With only four in suit, lead knave after nine.

_Queen, knave, ten, and small._

Lead queen.

With more than four in suit, lead ten after queen.

With only four in suit, lead knave after queen.

_Queen, knave, nine, &c. (in trumps)._

If ten is turned up to your right, lead queen.

_Queen, knave, and small ones._

From all strong suits headed by queen, knave (or by queen), other than those already enumerated, lead a small one (the fourth-best, if an American Leader).

From queen, knave, nine (six or more in suit), if an American Leader, lead fourth-best. If not, lead queen.

_Knave, ten, nine, eight, with or without small, ones._

_In trumps_, if queen or king is turned up to your left, lead knave. Otherwise, _in trumps_ or _plain suits_,

(_a._) If the second hand is known to adopt the practice, even though numerically weak in the suit, of not covering an honour with an honour (other than the ace, _see_ p. 88), lead eight.

With more than five in suit, lead nine after eight.

With five in suit, lead ten after eight.

With only four in suit, lead knave after eight.

(_b._) If the second hand adheres to the old practice of covering an honour with an honour when numerically weak in the suit, lead knave, then eight. And

With more than four in suit, lead nine after eight.

With only four in suit, lead ten after eight.

_Knave, ten, nine, and small._

_In trumps_, if king or queen is turned up to your left, lead knave. Otherwise, _in trumps_ or _plain suits_,

(_a._) If the second hand, when numerically weak, does not cover an honour with an honour (other than ace), lead a small one (the fourth-best if an American Leader).

(_b._) If the second hand, when numerically weak, covers an honour with an honour, lead knave. And,

With more than four in suit, lead nine after knave.

With only four in suit, lead ten after knave.

_Knave, ten, eight, &c. (in trumps)._

If nine is turned up to your right, lead knave.

_Knave, ten, and small ones._

From all strong suits headed by knave, ten (or by knave), with the exceptions enumerated, lead a small one (the fourth-best if an American Leader).

_Suits of four or more cards without an honour._

Lead a small card (the fourth-best if an American Leader).

3. LEAD THE HIGHEST OF A NUMERICALLY WEAK SUIT.

When it is your fate to open a numerically weak suit, your object should be to do as little harm as possible. You cannot expect to win many tricks, so you must do all you can to assist or _strengthen_ your partner by leading high or strengthening cards; for, by leading the highest of a suit numerically weak, you take the best chance of keeping the strength in your partner's hand, should he happen to hold it.

You will not often be driven to open a weak suit originally, as one of your suits must contain as many as four cards. But it may so turn out that your four-card suit is composed of very small cards indeed, in which case you might prefer to open a suit containing better cards, though numerically weaker. Every one can see that ace, king, queen, is a better suit to open than five, four, three, two; but, as you descend in one scale and ascend in the other, there comes a point where the two descriptions of strength nearly or quite balance. With hands containing only a suit of four small cards--say none higher than the seven or eight, and suits of three cards of higher value--the choice is sometimes difficult. Also, with hands in which your only four-card suit is the trump suit, you might sometimes deem it advisable to open one of the other suits, as a smaller evil than leading a trump. As a rule, when you are in doubt, stick to the general principle, and lead from your four-card suit, even though it is the trump suit.

Whenever you decide on opening a suit of but three cards, choose, if possible, one in which you hold a sequence which may be of benefit to your partner, as queen, knave, ten; queen, knave, and one small one; knave, ten, and one other, and so on, and lead the highest. If you have no sequence, lead from your strongest weak suit. Thus, two honours not in sequence, and one small one, is a better lead than ace and two small ones, or king and two small ones. These, again, should be chosen in preference to queen and two small ones. When leading from a numerically weak suit that contains ace, king, or queen, but no sequence, if you have any indication from the previous play that your partner is strong in the suit (as will be explained in Section 4), lead the highest. But having no guide as to his strength lead the lowest. You run the risk of making your partner think you have led from numerical strength; but, on the other hand, by leading out the high card, you at once give up the command of the suit, and, unless your partner has strength in it (the chances being against this), you leave yourself at the mercy of the opponents.

The case is different with numerically weak suits headed by a knave or a lower card. Of these suits you should lead the highest; by retaining such a card as the knave you would scarcely ever be able to stop the adversaries from establishing the suit, should they be strong in it; and, by leading out the high card, you do all you can to aid your partner, should he have strength.

Ace and one other, king and one other, or queen and one other, are very bad suits to lead from. By holding them up you and your partner stand a better chance of making tricks in the suit; and if it should be the adversaries' suit (the chances being two to one that it is) you keep the power of obstructing it and of obtaining the lead at advanced periods of the hand. If you lead from ace, king only, lead ace, then king.

It follows that when you lead a high card in the first round of a suit, and in the next drop a lower one (subject to the rules respecting leads from sequences and the lead from suits of five or more cards), your partner should infer you have led from a weak suit. Thus, suppose you lead a nine, which is called an equivocal card, as it comes from both strong and weak suits. If in the second round your partner can infer that you hold a higher card, he knows you have led from strength. But if in the second round you lead (say) the eight, your partner may be equally certain that the former card was the highest of your weak suit.

4. AVOID CHANGING SUITS.

_When you obtain the lead after one or more tricks have been played, the question arises whether or not you should open a fresh suit._ If you have had the lead before, it is generally advisable to pursue your original lead, for you thus take the best chance of establishing the suit, and you open a fresh suit to a disadvantage.

The fall of the cards in the previous rounds may cause you to alter your game. Thus, the previous play may have already established your suit, or may have so nearly established it as to justify you in leading trumps, as hereafter explained; or your partner may have shown a very strong suit, or a strong trump hand, which may modify your game. Again, your partner may prove utterly weak in your suit; you would then often discontinue it, unless holding the winning cards or a strong sequence, because, with these exceptions, your continuing it gives the adversary the opportunity of finessing against you, and of cutting up your suit; or you may sometimes discontinue a suit if you expect it will be trumped (as will be further explained in Sections 13-16); but, failing such indications, it is best, as a rule, to pursue the original lead.

If you have not had the lead before, it is in most cases advisable to open your strong suit, when you possess _great_ strength in any suit, for you open such suit to advantage; but with weak or only moderately strong suits, which you open to a disadvantage, you would, as a rule, do better to return your partner's original lead, or to lead up to the weak suit of your right-hand adversary, or through the strong suit of your left-hand adversary. When in doubt as to opening your own suit or returning your partner's, you should, as a general rule, be guided by your strength in trumps. With a strong trump hand play your own game; with a weak trump hand play your partner's game.

If your partner has had a lead, and you are thoroughly conversant with the system of leading developed in Sections 2 and 3, and with the Analysis of Leads (pp. 64-71), you know by the value of the card he has led whether he is strong or weak in that suit, unless he has led an equivocal card, which is led from both strong and weak suits. In this case, if you have no evidence from your own hand, or from the fall of the cards, you presume, with a good partner, that he has led from strength. But you mostly have some evidence; for instance, if he leads a ten originally, he has led from king, queen, knave, ten; from king, knave, ten; or the highest of his suit. If you hold--or either adversary plays--king or knave, you know that your partner has led the highest of his suit. But, in the absence of these cards, and especially if the ten wins the first round, or falls to the ace or queen, you may conclude that your partner's lead was from strength, and you would do perfectly right to return it.

When you have won the first trick in your partner's lead cheaply, you must be cautious in returning it, as the strength must be between your partner and your right-hand adversary. For example, say A, Y, B, Z, are the four players, and that they sit in this order round the table, so that A leads and Z is last player. If A leads a small card of a plain suit, Y plays a small one, and B (third player) puts on his best card, the queen, which wins the trick, it is clear that Z can have neither ace nor king; A cannot have them both, or he would have led one, therefore Y must have one of them at least; and, if B returns the lead, he leads up to Y's strength, and may cut up his partner's suit.

By observing the card led by either adversary, you can similarly tell whether he has led from strength or weakness; so also you can judge from the card played third hand by the adversary whether he is weak, it being presumed that the third player puts on his best. It is advantageous to lead up to a weak suit, because you compel the second hand to put on a high card, or give your partner the opportunity of finessing. It is generally less advantageous to lead through a strong suit, unless you are sure that the second hand is not _very_ strong, and that the fourth hand is weak. Otherwise, by continuing the suit, you may be establishing it for the adversary, and getting rid of the command of it from your partner's hand.

In discussing leads from weak suits it was supposed, for the sake of convenience, that the leader had no indication from the play to guide him. But in practice, in by far the greater number of cases, weak suits are opened late in a hand when inference from previous play has given an insight into the strength or weakness of the several players. Thus, you commence with your strong suit; your partner fails to show any strength in it. After several other tricks are played you get the lead again, remaining with (say) king and two others of your first lead. You do not wish to take one of the guards from your king, and you do not deem it advisable to lead a card which your partner may be obliged to trump. You therefore try another suit. By this time you know, either by the adversaries' leads what their strong suits are, or by the players' discards (_i.e._, by the cards they throw away when not able to follow suit,) what their weak suits are, as will be explained under discarding. Guided by these indications, you make choice of a suit for your second lead in which your partner is probably strong, and under such circumstances you would, as a rule, lead the highest of the suit of your second choosing, if numerically weak in it.

When you have led a strengthening card, and it wins the trick, you can rarely do better than continue with your next highest. For example: from queen, knave, and three you lead the queen, which goes round. It hardly requires to be stated that you make the best use of your suit by continuing with the knave. When your strengthening card does not win, the course of the play is the only guide as to whether you should continue the suit. The application of the considerations advanced in this Section will generally inform you where the strong and weak suits lie, and you will act accordingly, giving your partner his strong suit, or, if he has not shown one, leading up to the weak suit of the right-hand adversary, or through the strong suit of the left-hand adversary.

It has several times been assumed that it is advantageous to have the lead at advanced periods of a hand; we now see one principal reason why it is so. The leader knows by observation where the strong and the weak suits lie, and he will generally be able to make use of this knowledge in assisting his partner, or in obstructing his opponents.

The principles explained in the preceding pages apply mainly to the original lead, or to leads early in a hand. They apply also to leads generally; but, at advanced periods of the hand, and towards its close, their application is frequently modified by inferences from the previous play, and by the state of the score. Examples of departure from the rules here laid down will be presented in the illustrative hands.

In the second round of a suit--

5. RETURN THE LOWEST OF A STRONG SUIT, THE HIGHEST OF A WEAK SUIT.

When you return your partner's lead, the card you should choose to lead the second round depends on the number of cards of the suit you have remaining. Thus, if you remain with three cards, you must have had four at first. You therefore had strength in the suit, and you should return the smallest of the three remaining cards, agreeably to the principle that with strength it is to your advantage to retain the command in your own hand. If you remain with two cards only, you should return the higher one, to strengthen your partner; and, similarly, if you have discarded one of a four-suit, and are left with two only _at the time you return it_, you have destroyed the numerical power of your suit, and should therefore treat it as a weak suit, and return the higher card of the two remaining in your hand.

The advantages of this principle are numerous. In the case that you and your partner are both numerically strong, the return of the lowest prevents him from finessing in a suit which must be trumped third round. Further, if your hand is weak, you naturally return a suit in which you infer that your partner is strong. You then return a strengthening card to get a high card of your partner's strong suit out of his way, and you enable him to finesse if he thinks proper, and so to keep the command of his suit in his own hand.

It is true that with two small cards only (say the five and the six) you do not strengthen your partner by returning the six. But there is a collateral advantage in keeping to the rule even with small cards--_you enable a good partner to calculate how many you have left of the suit_, and often where the remainder of it lies. Thus, your partner leads a small card of a suit of which you have king, three, and two. You, as third player, put on the king. If you return the suit, you return the three, and not the two, when it ought to be inferred, either that you have returned the smallest of a suit of four or more, or that you have no more of the suit left, or the two only. When your two comes down in the third round it ought to be certain that you have no more. If your partner has confidence in you, he can often calculate what you have left before the third round is played; thus, in the above instance, your partner, not having the two himself, and seeing that it does not drop from the adversaries, concludes, with tolerable certainty, that you remain, after the second round, with the two and no more.

There are two exceptions to the rule of play above stated: 1. When you hold the winning card you return it, whatever number of cards you hold, lest it should be trumped the third round, or, your partner, imagining it to be against him, should finesse; and 2. When you hold the second and third best, in plain suits, you return the highest. Thus, suppose you have queen, knave, ten, and one small one of a suit of which your partner leads a small one, you (third hand) put on the ten, which is won by (say) the ace. If you afterwards return the suit, you should return the queen, for you not only force out the king, if against you, but you also do not block your partner's suit, should he have led from great numerical strength, say five cards to the nine, an advantage which you lose by returning the small one.

It should also be observed that, occasionally, when you return your adversary's strong lead, you do not lead the higher of two remaining cards, especially if you hold the second best guarded. For example, you are A; Y is your left-hand adversary. Y has led a king, which was won by the ace, leaving Y with the queen and others. You remain with knave and one small one. If you are driven to return this suit, you should return the small one. The queen will probably be put on second hand, and you will remain with the best.

THE SECOND HAND.

In the first round of a suit, you should generally,

6. PLAY YOUR LOWEST CARD SECOND HAND.

You presume that the first hand has led from strength, and, if you have a high card in his suit, you lie over him when it is led again; whereas, if you play your high card second hand, you get rid of a commanding card of the adversary's suit, and, when it is returned, the original leader finesses against you. Besides this, the third player will put on his highest card, and, if it is better than yours, you have wasted power to no purpose.

If, however, you have a sequence of high cards, you should put on one of the sequence second hand, for, if you pass the trick altogether, the third hand may win with a very low card, or, with his low card, may force a high one from your partner. The chief objection to playing an unsupported high card does not apply, as the leader cannot successfully finesse against you in the next round.

With a moderate sequence, such as queen, knave--knave, ten--ten, nine--you play the lowest of the sequence if you are numerically weak; but, with more than three cards of the suit, you pass a small card led, agreeably to the principle already discussed--that in weak suits you play to strengthen your partner, but in strong ones you leave him to help you. For instance: the leader (A) has king, ten, nine, eight, seven of a suit; the second player (Y) has queen, knave, and one small one; the fourth player (Z) has ace and two small ones. A leads a small card; Y should play the knave; if he does not, the card led forces Z's ace. It is true that this happens also if Y passes with queen, knave, and two small ones; but Y, in this case, has a guard to his queen and knave, and is left with the two winning cards after the second round of the suit.

With a sequence lower than ten, nine, there is no advantage in putting on one of the sequence; so the lowest should then be played second hand, in conformity with the general principle.

7. PLAY THE LOWEST OF A SEQUENCE.

When you do not head a trick, you throw away your lowest card to economise your strength. Thus, with queen and two small ones, you would not throw the queen to king led. It is an error to suppose that it is of no consequence which card you play when you hold only small cards or cards in sequence. It is not of much consequence as regards merely the chance of making tricks; but it is of great importance in affording information to partner.

Thus, suppose the players to be as before, A, Y, B, Z. A leads the three of a suit, Y plays the five, B the four. It ought to be certain that B has no more of the suit, it being presumed that he, not being able to head the trick, throws away his smallest. If he afterwards plays the two, and it turns out that he previously played the four _through carelessness_, his partner loses confidence, and gives up all hopes of drawing correct inferences from his play.

The principle applies equally to cards in sequence. Thus, say queen is led, and you (second hand) hold ace and king; if you put on the king, your partner gains the very important information that you have the ace also. For queen is not led from ace, queen, &c., so the leader cannot have the ace; the third hand cannot have it, or he would win the king; and the fourth, not having it himself, infers that you have it. If you put on the ace, not only could he not tell that you hold the king, but would assume that it lay with the leader's partner. The principle, though stated for the sake of convenience in respect of the second hand, applies to the third and fourth hands also. (For a fuller examination of this point _see_ Section 12.)

ANALYSIS OF PLAY OF SECOND HAND IN DETAIL.

(_See_ Note on Analysis of Leads, p. 64.)

_Ace, king, queen, &c._

Play lowest of ace, king, queen sequence.

_Ace, king, knave, &c._

Play king (but _see_ p. 89).

On the second round of the suit, it becomes a matter of judgment whether you should play ace or finesse knave. No positive rule can be laid down.

_Ace, king, &c._

Play king.

In trumps it is sometimes right to pass, leaving the chance of the first trick to your partner.

Obvious alterations on account of the trump card are omitted. It is clear that, with ace, king, &c., if your partner has turned up the queen, you should play a small one; and that, with ace, king, knave, if your right hand adversary has turned up the queen, you should play the knave; and so on for other cases.

_Ace, queen, knave, &c._

Play lowest of queen, knave sequence.

_Ace, queen, ten, &c._

In trumps, play ten, or with cards in sequence, the lowest of the ten sequence.

In plain suits, if strong enough in trumps to lead them, play ten, or lowest of sequence; if weak in trumps, play queen (but _see_ p. 89).

With ace, queen, ten only, play ten, whether strong in trumps or not.

_Ace, queen, &c._

Small card led.

In trumps, play a small one.

In plain suits, with five in suit, play a small one if strong in trumps; the queen if weak in trumps.

Knave led.

Play ace. It is useless to cover with the queen, as the leader cannot hold the king (_see_ Analysis of Leads).

These instructions assume ordinary original leads from strength. If ace or queen is turned up, some players lead knave, from king, knave, ten. If you know this is the practice of your right hand adversary, you should exercise your judgment as to covering with ace or queen.

Also towards the close of a hand, knave might be led from king, knave for various reasons, perhaps as the best chance of saving or winning the game or a point, or as a false card. No rule can be laid down for such cases.

Ten or nine led.

Play queen.

_Ace, knave, ten, &c._

In trumps, play ten, or with cards in sequence with the ten, the lowest of the sequence.

In plain suits, play a small one.

The reason for the difference is that, in trumps a small card may be led from king, queen, &c.; but in plain suits, not. Hence as, in plain suits, the king or queen must be in the third or fourth hand, your strength would be wasted by covering.

_Ace and small ones._

Play a small one.

As before observed, the original lead of a small card from strength is assumed.

If, after several tricks have been played, you particularly want the lead, or you suspect the possibility of a lead from a single card, or one trick is of importance, you would often be right to play the ace. Again, no rule can be laid down.

_King, queen, knave, &c._

Play the lowest of the king, queen, knave sequence.

_King, queen, &c._

Small card led.

Play queen.

In trumps it is sometimes right to pass, unless you hold ten also, or only three in suit.

Knave led.

The usual practice is to cover with the queen. But, it can be shown by calculation that, if the lead is from knave, ten, nine, and small, more is gained than lost, in the long run, by passing.

The best lead from knave, ten, nine, &c., is disputed; and so also is the question of covering.

_King, knave, ten, &c._

Play the lowest of the knave, ten sequence.

_Queen, knave, ten, &c._

Play ten, or lowest of sequence.

_Knave, ten, nine, &c._

Play nine, or lowest of sequence.

_Queen, knave, and small; knave, ten, and small; ten, nine, and small._

Play as directed at pp. 82-3.

_Covering or passing second hand._

If an honour is led, and you have the ace, as a rule play the ace.

If an honour is led, and you hold an honour, not the ace, pass as a rule.

It was formerly the practice to cover an honour with an honour, if numerically weak. Calculation shows more is gained than lost, in the long run, by passing. But, if a strengthening card is led, late in a hand, it would often be right to cover. No positive rule can be laid down for the play of the second hand under such circumstances. When you have the _fourchette_ it is almost always right to cover. Thus, if knave is led, and you hold queen, ten, &c., put on the queen.

If a ten is led, and you hold queen and one small one, play queen. The lead is probably from king, knave, ten, &c., and the queen may save your partner's ace. With queen and two small ones, or with other combinations not enumerated as those with which a high card should be played second hand, pass.

If a nine is led, and you hold king and one small one, play king. The leader must have opened an ace suit (either ace, queen, ten, nine, or ace, knave, ten, nine), assuming him to have led from a suit of four cards. The same applies if you hold king, nine, and eight is led.

If a medium card is led from a suit of at least four cards, three being higher than the card led, and you hold cards that (together with the leader's cards) make up a sequence, cover with the lowest card you can. For example:--The original lead is an eight. You (second hand) hold ace, king, ten, with or without small ones. If the lead was from queen, knave, nine, eight, as is most probable, and the ten is put on, it will win the trick.

Again: the original lead is a seven. You hold ace, queen, knave, eight. If the seven is the lowest of a four card suit, the lead must have been from king, ten, nine, seven. Therefore, the eight put on will win the trick.

The same applies, if the leader of an ace follows with a medium card. For example:--Ace is led originally. The next lead of an American Leader is, say, the eight. You had originally king, queen, ten, four, and you played the four to the ace. The leader must hold knave, nine and small. You should, therefore play the ten. And, observe, the play would be the same, if the second lead of a player who does not follow the American system were the seven, as then he must hold knave, nine, eight.

If a small card is led, and you hold an honour and a small card, pass the trick as a rule; for by putting on the honour you expose your weakness, and enable the original leader to finesse against you on the second round. The principal general exception to playing a small card second hand, is when the circumstances of the hand cause you to seize any chance of getting the lead, as when you want to stop a lead of trumps, or to lead trumps yourself. Then it is often right to play a high card second hand, when unsupported by another high card.

Also, in trumps, if king or queen is turned up, and you hold it singly guarded (_i.e._, if you have only one other trump), it is generally advisable to put on the turn-up, second hand. And if you hold king or queen, singly guarded, and a superior honour is turned up to your right, you should play the king or queen.

* * * * *

In the second round of a suit, if you have the winning card, you should--in plain suits--generally put it on second hand, subject to a finesse that will certainly be successful; but in trumps there are many cases in which you should not, especially if you have numerical strength in trumps, and a good hand besides. Your winning trump must make, and, by passing the second round, you perhaps enable your partner to win with a third best trump--or even a smaller one--yourself retaining the command.

If, when led through in the second round of a suit, you conclude from the previous fall of the cards that the second best card is to your right, it is sometimes advisable to put on the third best. You thus save your partner's hand if he holds the best. For instance: if knave is led in the first round, and your partner (then second player) puts on king, which wins the trick, it is clear (if the ten is your best) that your partner has the ace, for the third player could not win the king, and the leader could not have led from ace, knave. If your right-hand adversary afterwards returns the suit through you, you should put on the ten in order to save your partner's ace.

THE THIRD HAND.

(_See_ also "Whist Developments." DE LA RUE & Co.)

In the first round of a suit, you should generally

8. PLAY YOUR HIGHEST CARD THIRD HAND,

in order to strengthen your partner. You presume that he leads from his strong suit, and wants to get the winning cards of it out of his way; you, therefore, do not finesse, but play your highest, remembering that you play the lowest of a sequence.

With ace, queen (and, of course, ace, queen, knave, &c., in sequence) you do finesse, for, in this case, the finesse cannot be left to your partner. In trumps you may finesse ace, knave, if an honour is turned up to your right. Some players finesse knave with king, knave, &c.; but it is contrary to principle to finesse in your partner's strong suit.

If your partner leads a high card originally, you assume it is led from one of the combinations given in the Analysis of Leads (pp. 64-71), and your play third hand must be guided by a consideration of the combination led from. With ace, you pass queen led; you are then in much the same position as though a small card were led, and you finessed with ace, queen.

Knave, led originally, is from king, queen, knave, &c. (some players lead knave from knave, ten, nine, &c.) In either case, if you hold ace with one small card, play the ace; with more than one small card, pass (_see_ p. 98). If your only honour is the king, you should pass knave led. For, the second hand having passed, you assume ace to be to your left (p. 88). Should the queen be there also, you waste the king by covering; and if queen is to your right, the knave forces the ace.

Ten may be led originally from king, queen, knave, ten, or from king, knave, ten, &c. If you hold ace, you should put it on; but if you hold queen, you should pass. Holding both ace and queen, your play depends on whether you wish to obtain the lead on the first round of the suit.

If your partner opens a suit, late in a hand, with a high card, your play, third hand, will depend on your judgment of the character of the lead. If it is probable that your partner has led from a weak suit, you will often be right to finesse king, knave, &c., or to pass his card altogether, so as not to give up the entire command of the suit. Thus, if ten is led and you hold ace, knave, &c., it is clear that the card led is the highest your partner holds in the suit. You therefore pass, and unless both king and queen are to your left, you remain with the tenace. Similar remarks apply to a forced lead of knave, when you hold ace, ten, &c. If you have considerable strength in a suit in which a strengthening card is led, you must be guided by your strength in trumps. Thus, your partner leads knave from a weak suit, and you hold ace, king, and small ones. You may, as a rule, pass the knave if you are strong in trumps, but not if weak.

In the second round of a suit, if you (third player) hold the best and third best cards, and you have no indication as to the position of the intermediate card, your play should again depend on your strength in trumps. If weak in trumps, secure the trick at once; if strong in trumps, and especially if strong enough to lead a trump (_see_ Management of Trumps, pp. 120-24), should the finesse succeed, it is generally right to make it. If you hold second and fourth best, you may nearly always finesse; for you conclude that the winning card is over you in the fourth hand, since your partner has not led it, and the second player has not put it on. If the third best lies over you also, you cannot prevent the tenace from making, and your only chance, therefore, is to finesse. Thus, if you lead a small card from queen, ten, and two small ones, your partner wins the first trick with the king, and returns a small one. The ace is certainly to your left; you therefore finesse the ten, for if your left-hand adversary holds ace and knave he must make them both; but, otherwise, your ten forces the ace, and you are left with the best. In trumps, the winning card is often held up by the adversary, but you must submit to this contingency, and generally finesse.

It is of no use to finesse against your right-hand adversary in a suit in which he has shown weakness. For instance, if the second hand has none of the suit led, and does not trump it, you (third hand) should not finesse a major tenace (_i.e._, the best and third best cards). This often occurs in the second or third round of a suit; also, if your partner (third player) has won a trick very cheaply, and the suit is returned, it is rarely of any use to finesse if you have the winning card.

In some few positions, however, it is necessary to finesse, even if the second player holds nothing. Thus, your partner leads a knave, and the second hand renounces (_i.e._, does not follow suit); if you (third player) hold king, it is useless to cover, as ace, queen in the fourth hand must make. Again, you have king, and two small trumps; your partner leads a small one; the second hand renounces. If you want one trick to win or save the game, you (third player) play a small trump, when the fourth player will be obliged to lead up to your king guarded.

The state of the game and of the score will often direct as to a finesse late in a hand. Thus, if you hold a winning card, and want one trick to save or win the game, of course you should not run any risk. A finesse against even one card is generally wrong, if, by playing otherwise, you prevent the adversary from scoring three or five. A finesse is almost always bad, if by not finessing you insure the odd trick, as that makes a difference of two to the score. In the opposite case, a finesse is generally right (sometimes even against more than one card), if its success gives you the odd trick, or puts you at the score of three or five.

The considerations as to finessing and the course of play generally, that come in as the hand proceeds, are so complicated, and depend so much on inferences from previous play, and on the state of the score, that one can scarcely do more than to state a few broad rules, and to add some examples. Illustrations of the conduct of the hand at advanced periods will be found in Sections 17 and 18 (pp. 134-155), and more in the hands.

THE FOURTH HAND.

The fourth player having, with a few exceptions, merely to win the trick, if against him, his play involves no further development of general principles.

The exceptional cases, where the fourth hand should not win the trick though he can, or should win his partner's trick in order to get the lead, depend so much on the previous fall of the cards, that they can best be illustrated in the hands.

THE COMMAND OF SUITS.

(_See_ also Appendix B., pp. 287-8.)

In the foregoing chapters it has been incidentally stated that you should

9. KEEP THE COMMAND OF YOUR ADVERSARY'S SUIT: AND

10. GET RID OF THE COMMAND OF YOUR PARTNER'S SUIT.

The reasons will be obvious to those who are familiar with the previous pages; in the first case, you obstruct the adversaries' suits, and prevent their establishing them; in the second case, you assist in clearing the suit for your partner.

Thus, with ace and queen only of a suit led by your partner, if you win with the queen, play out the ace at once; but, if the suit is led by your adversary, keep the ace in your hand. If you play out the winning card of the opponent's suit in hopes of trumping the next round, which is often done by those who play a trumping game, you do just what the adversaries want; for the lead of the ace gives them valuable assistance towards bringing in their suit when trumps are out.

Though the advantage of getting rid of the command of a suit, of which your partner has declared numerical strength, is recognised theoretically, the application of the principle is much neglected in practice. In order to get rid, at the proper moment, of the command of your partner's suit, a thorough knowledge of the Analysis of Leads is requisite, as the following examples will show:--1. Your partner leads ace, originally, of a plain suit. He has led from ace, queen, knave, &c., or from a suit of five cards at least. You have four of the suit, say ten, nine, eight, two. To his ace, you should play the eight, not the two. All follow suit, and your partner continues with knave, or with a small card. You now know for certain that he led from five at least. You should play the nine, even if the second hand puts on a winning card or a trump. When the suit is led again, you should play the ten. Your partner is left with two small cards, and you do not block his suit; if you had played two, eight, nine, it is very probable that you would keep the command of the suit with the ten. 2. If instead of ten, nine, eight, two, you held, say, ten, nine, three, two, and your partner leads ace and a small one, you should similarly play the nine on the second round. 3. If your partner led from ace, queen, knave and one small one (as you will be informed by his leading queen after ace), you cannot block the suit; but, if you have played the eight to the ace, as in Example 1, you must still play the nine to the queen, or you have called for trumps (_see_ p. 125). You lose nothing by this, as you and your partner still retain the winning cards of the suit. If on the third round you find it necessary to play your small card, you have not called for trumps (_see_ Appendix B, pp. 287-8). 4. Similarly, you have king, queen, and two small cards of a plain suit of which your partner leads ace and a small one. All follow suit to the ace; the second hand trumps the small one. You should play the queen, and to the third round the king. 5. Your partner leads knave of a plain suit originally, from king, queen, knave, and at least two small cards. The second hand plays a small card. You (third hand) hold ace, &c. Whether or not you should put on the ace, depends on the number of small cards you hold. Having only one small card, you should play the ace, that you may not block the suit. Having more than one small card, you pass the knave. Suppose the knave wins the trick, and your partner continues with king or queen. If you now remain with ace and one small card, you should put on the ace; but, if you have ace and two small cards left, you should pass again, as you still have the power of getting rid of the command on the third round. 6. To continue the previous example. Say the two rounds of your partner's suit have resulted in the fall of seven cards of it, and that you still have ace and a small one left. Your adversary now leads the suit a third time, that his partner may trump it. You should play the ace, keeping the small card of the suit of which your partner will still hold two cards. 7. If your partner leads a small card of a plain suit originally, and you can tell from the fall of the cards that the card led was not his absolute lowest, you know he led from a suit of more than four (_see_ Analysis of Leads), and if you had four originally, you should be prepared to get rid of the command on the subsequent rounds. For example:--Your partner leads eight. All follow suit, and the queen falls. On obtaining the lead again, your partner leads the six, showing that he led from at least five cards. Ace comes out. One adversary does not follow suit. You held, originally, knave, five, four, three, and have played the three and the four. Your partner now has the lead again, and leads the king of his suit. You, holding knave and one small one, would play very badly to retain the knave. You should throw the knave on the king, and your partner's suit is freed. 8. Your hand contains four cards, viz., ace and one small spade (spades not having been led), and two losing diamonds; your partner has nothing but spades, of which he leads the king. If you pass it you cannot make more than two tricks, for the winning diamonds are against you in one hand; but, if you win your partner's king, and return the small one, and your partner has led from king, queen, you still win two tricks, and get a chance of making three or four.

A collateral advantage of playing as advised, is that a good partner will often know how many of his suit you still have in hand. Thus, he leads knave, which you pass; he continues with queen, which you win. It ought to be a certainty that you remain with one small card of his suit and no more. If you pass again, it should be equally certain, when your ace comes down in the third round, that you have one small card of the suit in hand. Again: your partner leads ace and knave; knave is won by the adversary with the king. You, holding ten, nine, eight, deuce, have played eight and nine of the suit. If the winner of the trick does not lead a trump, your partner would infer, with tolerable certainty, that you remain with the deuce and ten of his suit, as no one is asking for trumps (_see_ p. 125) and no one has played the deuce in two rounds.

In trumps, the case is somewhat different, as you cannot block your partner's trump suit. It is then only advisable to get out of his way, if you see from the fall of the cards that it is essential he should proceed with trumps. Thus: with ace and one small trump you would not put ace on his knave led, unless very desirous of three rounds of trumps immediately. Moreover, in trumps, your partner can count your hand in another way; for with four trumps you would echo, as will be fully explained under Management of Trumps (p. 128).

You help your partner to get rid of the command of your suit by leading the lowest of a sequence, notwithstanding that it heads your suit, when you want him to win your card if he can. For this reason you lead ten from king, queen, knave, ten; ace, knave from ace, queen, knave, and at least two small cards; and so on. In this last case, if your partner has king, whether he should put it on your knave, or not, depends on how many small cards of the suit he holds. If, when you lead knave, he remains with king and one small one, he should win the knave with the king; but if he has king and two small ones remaining, he should pass the knave, for precisely the same reasons as those given in the previous examples. Again, suppose you are left with knave, ten, and others of a suit, of which your partner can only have king and another (ace and queen being out), though it is uncertain whether he does hold the king. You would cause him to get rid of the king by leading the ten; whereas, if you led the knave, he probably would not part with the king.

Experienced players frequently endeavour to steal a trick, or to obtain the entire command of a suit (_i.e._, to keep a sufficient number of winning or commanding cards in it to make every trick), by _underplaying_. Underplay is keeping up the winning card, generally in the second round of a suit, by leading a low card, though holding the best.

Thus, suppose a small trump is led, and you (fourth player) hold ace, knave, and two small ones, and you win with one of the small ones. If, at a later period of the hand, you return a small trump, you will very likely cause your left-hand adversary to believe that your partner has the ace; consequently, if your left-hand adversary has the king, he may not put it on; your partner will win the second round with the queen, and you will retain the command of the trump suit.

Underplay is an extempore stratagem depending on observation of the previous fall of the cards, and, therefore, best capable of explanation by examples. Thus: A, finding his partner strong in trumps, leads the seven. The king is put on by Y (second hand), which B (third hand) wins, holding ace, queen, ten, nine, eight. It is evident to B that A's seven was his highest trump, as the only higher one in is the knave, and A would never lead the seven from knave, seven. The king having been put on second hand, B concludes that Y, in all probability, holds at most one small trump more. The knave is, to a moral certainty, in Z's hand. B, by leading the eight in the second round, will probably win the trick, and unless Z had four trumps originally, will catch the knave with the queen in the third round. (Further examples of underplay occur in the hands.)

Players should be on their guard against this manœuvre, particularly when second hand, in the second round of a suit, they hold the second best card guarded, and the adversary has been playing a strong game (as by leading trumps), and is left with the long trump, or is certain to be able to obtain the lead again. Then it is often right for the second hand to stick on a singly-guarded second best card, especially if that is the only chance of making it. In the case stated in the previous paragraph, Z's only chance of making the knave, if singly guarded, is to put it on second hand. For, if the queen with small ones is in A's hand, A is sure to finesse on the return of the suit by his partner. Again, take this case: A leads the six of diamonds; Y, with knave, ten, and a small one, puts on the ten; B plays the king, and Z wins it with the ace. Presently, A obtains the lead again, and leads the eight of diamonds. A, having led the lowest of his suit in the first round, it may be inferred that he has led from a strong suit--headed in this case by the queen--and that he is underplaying with, probably, queen and nine in his hand. Y should observe this, and in the second round should win the eight with the knave.

Refusing to play the winning card in the first and second rounds of a suit--commonly called _holding up_--is, in fact, a species of underplay. For example:--1. Trumps are led by the player to your left; the third player wins with the ace, and returns the suit through your hand. If you are left with king and one or more small ones, you should play a small one, unless the circumstances of the hand are such that you deem it advantageous to stop the trump lead. The original trump leader, not knowing but that the king is in your partner's hand, will probably finesse, and your partner thus has a chance of making the third best trump, even though unguarded. If your partner has neither second nor third best trump, no harm is done, as you will then probably make but one trick in the suit, however you play. 2. Again, ten tricks are played, and each player is left with three cards of a suit not opened. If the second player puts on the queen (from which it may be inferred that he holds the king also), the third hand should not cover with the ace. For, by winning the trick, he must lead up to king guarded; but, by passing it, he leaves the lead with the second player, and takes the best chance of making two tricks. 3. One more example will suffice: A has the last trump, and ace, ten, and three small cards of a suit not led. The adversary now leads the king, and follows with the queen of that suit. A should pass them both; by so doing he will probably make three tricks in the suit if the cards are equally divided.

DISCARDING.

When you cannot follow suit, you should

11. DISCARD FROM YOUR WEAKEST SUIT.

You weaken a suit by discarding from it, and lessen the number of long cards you might otherwise establish and bring in (_i.e._, make tricks with if trumps are out, and you obtain the lead after the establishment of your suit). On the other hand, you do but little harm by throwing from a suit in which you are already weak. Your partner should understand that your first or _original discard_ is from your _weakest suit_, just as he understands that your original lead is from your strongest suit.

But, as in the case of leads, you are sometimes obliged to lead from a weak suit, or to make a forced lead, so sometimes you have to make a _forced discard_. Forced discards require much more careful consideration than they generally receive.

It is clear that if the opponents declare great strength in trumps (by leading trumps or asking for them, as will be fully explained in Section 13), that your chance of bringing in a suit is practically _nil_. You should therefore, in such cases, abandon the tactics you would otherwise adopt, and play to guard your weaker suits, by discarding from your best protected suit, which is generally your longest suit. You must, in fact, play a defensive game.

If this system of discarding is comprehended by the two players who are partners, it follows, as a matter of course, that _when trumps are not declared against you, your partner will assume you are weak in the suit you first discard_; but, _when trumps are declared against you, he will give you credit for strength in the suit from which you originally throw away_. This is most important, as it affects his subsequent leads. In the first case, he will refrain from leading the suit from which you have discarded; in the second, he will, unless he has a very strong suit of his own, select for his lead the suit in which you have shown strength by your discard.

It is commonly said, "Discard from your strong suit when the adversary leads or calls for trumps." But this is a very imperfect and misleading aphorism. If you have no indications from the play, and are obliged to discard to an adverse trump lead or call, you should discard from your best protected suit. But, if you have, or if the fall of the cards shows that your partner has, sufficient strength in trumps to outlast the adversary, the discard should be from the weak suit. Thus: Y, second player, calls for trumps (_see_ p. 125), and B, third player, also calls. The discards of A and Z should be from their weak suits. For though, on the one hand, great strength in trumps is declared against them, on the other hand great strength is also declared with them. Again: Z deals and turns up nine of clubs. A (the original leader) leads a small club; Y follows suit; B puts on ace; Z plays king. This shows that Z has a sequence of queen, knave, ten, nine of trumps; and therefore that, though A has led a trump, he has anything but the command of the suit. B returns the trump; Z wins; Y has no more trumps. His discard should be from his weakest suit. The following case is less easy:--The adversary (A) leads a tierce major in trumps, eleven trumps come out, and your partner (Y) must have knave of trumps to save the game. You now credit your partner with the command of trumps, though the adversary has led them; and if either you (Y) or your partner (Z) has to discard, the discard should be from the weakest suit (_see_ Hand XII.) Similar remarks apply if a strengthening trump is led by an adversary from weak trumps and good cards in plain suits.

It must be borne in mind that it is only your original discard which is directive. Having once discarded, you cannot undo your work by any number of discards from another suit. Also, having once led a suit, you have declared strength in it; and subsequent discards from that suit do not alter the fact that it was originally your strongest suit.

It is dangerous to unguard an honour, or to blank an ace; and, also, to discard a single card when the game is in an undeveloped stage, as it exposes your weakness almost as soon as the suit is led. But, when you see that there is a probability of strength in trumps on your side, direct your partner to your strong suit by all the means in your power, and unhesitatingly unguard an honour, or throw a single card. Of course, if strength in trumps is against you, these are the very last cards you should think of throwing away.

When your left-hand adversary will have the lead next round, if you discard from a suit in which you hold a tenace, you may possibly induce him to lead that suit up to you. You must be on your guard against this ruse, and not necessarily lead up to the discard of your right-hand opponent.

The same principle applies to trumping as to discarding. The weaker you are in trumps, the better it is for you to make a little one by trumping, as will be further explained in Section 14.

THE CONVERSATION OF THE GAME.

12. AFFORD INFORMATION BY YOUR PLAY.

It has several times been assumed in the preceding pages that you should convey information by your play. The question naturally arises, _How is it that a player gains any advantage by publishing information to the table?_ It is often argued, and with much show of reason, that as almost every revelation concerning your hand must be given to the whole table, and that as you have two adversaries and only one partner, you publish information at a disadvantage. No doubt this argument would have considerable force if you were compelled to expose the whole of your hand. But you possess the power, to a great extent, of selecting what facts shall be announced and what concealed.

Experienced players are unanimous in admitting that it is an advantage to inform your partner of strength in your own suits, though some advise concealment of strength in suits in which the adversaries have shown strength. Thus, with ace, king, second hand, the usual play is to put on the king. The third hand does not win the king, and hence the leader is able to infer that the ace of his strong suit is against him. But, if you put on the ace second hand, you prevent the leader from discovering where the king of his suit lies. It is, however, found that two honours in the adversary's suit constitute sufficient strength to make it advantageous in the long run to proclaim your force; while, with less strength, it is not easy to mystify the opponents prejudicially; so that, on the whole, it seldom happens that a balance of gain results from the adoption of deceptive play.

Occasionally, however, a false card may be played with a special object. For instance: ace is turned up to your right, and, when the dealer gets in, he leads a small trump. If you, second hand, have king, queen only, you would be justified in playing the king, in hopes of inducing the trump leader to finesse on the return of the suit. Or, take this case: your left-hand adversary leads originally the five of his strong suit, from king, ten, seven, five. Your partner plays the six; third hand plays ace. You, holding queen, knave, nine, eight, four, three, play the three. Your right-hand opponent now leads trumps; all the trumps come out. The player to your right next returns the deuce of his partner's suit. The original lead being from a four-card suit, king, ten, seven, remain in the leader's hand. If you play knave, the original leader will place queen in your hand, and will hesitate to go on with the suit. But, if you play queen, he will put knave and at least one small one in his partner's hand. Then if, under this impression, he continues the suit, you bring it in.

It is in most cases unquestionably disadvantageous to you that the whole table should be aware of your being very weak in a particular suit, and, consequently, information of weakness should be withheld as long as possible. If you are led up to fourth hand in such a suit, or if your partner opens the suit with a small card, of course the disclosure is inevitable; but until one of these events happens your poverty can generally be kept out of sight. It may happen that you are occasionally forced to lead a weak suit yourself; and in this event the least disadvantage, on the whole, is to tell the truth at once, by first leading the highest of it. Your partner apprised of the state of your hand, by the fall of your smaller card in the subsequent round, will probably deem it prudent to strive by defensive tactics to avert total defeat in that suit, rather than to contend single-handed against the combined strength of the opponents. But, at critical points of the game, it is often right to conceal weakness. Thus, towards the end of a hand, it is necessary that your partner should make a couple of tricks in an unopened suit, of which you hold two or three little cards. You should lead the lowest. If you lead the highest, the adversaries will suspect your weakness at once, and will be sure of it on the second round. Their efforts will then be directed to preventing your partner from making the required tricks in that suit. Your left-hand adversary will not finesse; and if your partner is led through, your right-hand adversary merely covers, or plays the lowest card he has, higher than the one you first led.

When your partner has exhibited weakness in one or more suits, you would frequently be justified in playing a false card. You are driven to rely solely on yourself, and are entitled to adopt every artifice your ingenuity can suggest in order to perplex the other side. The consideration that you may mislead your partner will no longer influence you, as you know him to be powerless for good or for evil.

You inform your partner by following the recognised practice of the game, as by leading from your strong suit originally, by leading the highest of a sequence, by following suit with the lowest of a sequence, and so forth. If you adhere to this you will soon acquire a reputation for playing a straightforward intelligible game; and this character alone will counterbalance the disadvantage which will sometimes attach to the fact that you have enabled the adversaries to read your hand. If your partner knows that you play at random and without method, he will be in a state of constant uncertainty; and you almost preclude him from executing any of the finer strokes of play, the opportunities for which generally arise from being able to infer with confidence the position of particular cards. The extreme case of two skilled players against two unskilled ones amounts almost to this, that towards the close of a hand the former have the same advantage as though they had seen each other's cards, while the latter have not.

It follows that when you are unfortunately tied to an untaught partner, especially if at the same time you are pitted against observant adversaries, you should expose your hand as little as possible, particularly in respect of minor details.

It will become apparent, on consideration, that the question of the advisability of affording information is more or less intimately connected with every card that is played. It is, therefore, of extreme importance to ascertain whether the practice is advantageous or the reverse. The arguments just adduced are doubtless in favour of the practice of affording information by the play; but it must be admitted that by far the strongest authority for it is that experienced players, by their settled opinions, reject the opposite course.

The instructed player frequently selects one card in preference to another with the _sole_ object of affording information. When the principle is carried thus far, the play becomes purely conventional. For example: you naturally win a trick as cheaply as possible; if, fourth hand, you could win with a ten, you would not waste an ace. But suppose you hold knave and ten, which card should then be played? The knave and ten in one hand are of equal value, and therefore to win with the knave would be no unnecessary sacrifice of strength. Nevertheless, you extend to such cases the rule of winning as cheaply as possible, and you play the ten for the mere purpose of conveying information. This is a simple instance of pure convention. Again: the system of returning the higher of two losing cards (_see_ p. 80) when they are both small cards, is purely conventional. To take another case: after two rounds of your four-card suit, you are left with two losing cards, say the six and the seven, and you, having the lead, are about to continue the suit; you should lead the six, not the seven, in accordance with the rule that you lead the lowest card of a suit, except with commanding strength. This being the convention, if you lead the seven, your partner will infer that you cannot hold the six, and will suppose that you led from a three-card suit, in consequence of exceptional circumstances; if he is a good player he will miscount all the hands, probably to your mutual discomfiture.

Whist conventions, it will be observed, are in accordance with, and are suggested by, principle. Indeed, all the established conventions of the game are so chosen as to harmonise with play that would naturally be adopted independently of convention. The aggregation of the recognised rules of play, including the established conventions, constitute what in practice is called the Conversation of the Game of Whist.

It must not be overlooked that unsound players often deceive unintentionally, and all players sometimes with intention. It is, therefore, necessary to be on your guard against drawing inferences too rigidly.

There are some ways of conveying information which have not been explained. For example: if you have the complete command of a suit, you can publish the fact by discarding the highest of it; the presumption being that you would never throw away a winning card with a losing one in your hand. If you discard a second-best card of a suit of which your partner does not know you to hold a long sequence, you ought to have no more of the suit, for with the best also you would discard that, and with a smaller one you would discard that. By winning with the highest, and returning the lowest of a sequence (more especially fourth hand), you show that you have the intermediate cards. Thus, with ace, king, queen, fourth hand, if you desire to continue the suit, and at the same time to show that you still remain with the winning card, you would win with the ace and return the queen. Again, as long as you keep the turn-up card in hand, your partner knows where it is; so, having turned up a nine and holding the ten, trump with the ten in preference. This rule, however, is liable to exceptions. With very small trumps, of equal value, trumping with the higher card may be mistaken for an exhibition of four or five trumps; also, if you are weak in trumps, and the adversaries have shown strength in them, it is not advisable to keep the turn-up card; for, if the adversaries know you have it in your hand, they will draw it, whereas, if you play it, they may be uncertain as to your holding another. If you open a suit of ace, king only, it must be a forced lead. You then adopt the rule of leading the highest of a numerically weak suit, and first lead the ace. This shows your partner (unless you have already been forced, when you lead the ace before king for other reasons), that you have no more of the suit. Also, by leading the lowest of a head sequence of winning trumps (subject, if an American Leader, to a selection of card in order to show number), you convey information. Thus, you lead a small trump, partner plays queen, won with king. You remain with ace, knave, ten. On obtaining the lead, you continue with the ten, and, when it wins, you have shown two by honours (unless ace is held up, which is unlikely). If you continue with ace, as in plain suits, your partner can tell nothing about the knave and ten. You may pursue the same method in plain suits when your partner has no more trumps, and with any head sequence when you want him to win the trick, or are sure he cannot, and also when the fourth hand has already renounced in the suit led.

A most valuable mode of conveying very precise information of strength is within the reach of players who think fit to adopt _American Leads_ (_see_ Appendix A). As the propriety of these leads is questioned by some players, it may be stated that they form a beautiful system which is in full harmony with the established principles of whist play.

With regard to the American system when leading a high card of your strong suit after a high card, no one disputes the propriety of leading ace, then queen, from ace, queen, knave, and one small card; and of leading ace, then knave, from ace, queen, knave, and more than one small card. In the case of the four-card suit, you select the higher card to tell your partner not to play the king, as you have not sufficient numerical power to defend the suit single-handed. In the case of a suit of more than four cards, you select the lower card that your partner may not retain the command of your suit, and may play the king, should he happen to have held king and two small ones originally. For a similar reason, it is obvious that with queen, knave, ten, and one small card, you should follow queen with knave; with queen, knave, ten, and more than one small card, you should follow queen with ten.

Now, here is a germ of a principle of play. Holding two high indifferent cards, and only four of your suit, your second lead is the higher card; holding more than four, your second lead is the lower card.

For the sake of uniformity, you should pursue the same plan in all cases where, after your first lead, you remain with two high indifferent cards. Thus, your original lead is a ten, from king, knave, ten, and one or more small cards. The queen is played to your ten. You have the lead again, and it is immaterial, so far as establishing the suit is concerned, whether you proceed with the king or with the knave. But, if your practice is uniform, and in accordance with the practice which obtains in the case of ace, queen, knave, and of queen, knave, ten, you can inform your partner whether you led from a suit of four cards or of more than four cards. If you continue with the king, the higher of two indifferent cards, you led from king, knave, ten, and one small card; if you continue with the knave, the lower of two indifferent cards, you led from king, knave, ten, and more than one small card.

With regard to the American system, when opening your strong suit with a low card, those who have already adopted the _penultimate lead_ from suits of five cards, will have no difficulty in again discovering the germ of a principle of play. The fourth-best card of your suit is led from suits of four cards, and from suits of five cards.

You have only to apply the same rule to suits of more than five cards, and to lead your fourth-best card. You then pursue a uniform practice, and at the same time convey valuable information. (_See_ Appendix A).

As an illustration, take this suit--queen, ten, nine, eight. You lead the eight. Now suppose your suit to be queen, ten, nine, eight, three. You still lead the eight. Now add one more card. Your suit is queen, ten, nine, eight, three, two. You should still lead the eight. No doubt, a careful player would lead the eight, as a card of protection, even if American leads had never been thought of. With lower cards, such as queen, nine, eight, seven, three, two, it is possible a careful player might lead the seven; and with still lower cards, where is he to stop? The knot is cut by the very simple and uniform rule of leading the fourth-best, without reference to the possibility of its being a card of protection.

With regard to the lead of a high card followed by a low card, when the American system is followed, the low card selected should be the original fourth-best. (_See_ Appendix A).

The more the American system is examined, the more thorough and perfect it will be found. Care, however, must be taken, with leads late in a hand, not to confuse a fourth-best lead with a forced lead of the highest card of a weak suit. The American rule only applies, in its integrity to the original lead,--or after one or more tricks have been played, to the original lead of the player's own choice, (_See_ Appendix A). Also, it may be, that the leader, with very strong cards in all plain suits, starts by leading a strengthening trump. The uncertainty of the real character of the lead, in this case, is no doubt unfavourable; but, the advantage of frequently being able to give information of great numerical strength far outweighs this occasional danger.

Information as to the number of trumps you hold can be similarly communicated when you have more than four trumps, by trumping with the fourth-best and then leading the fourth-best of those remaining. This rule, however, is subject to rather a large exception. When your fourth-best trump is a medium card, such as an eight, trumping with the eight may imperil a trick later on. For instance: with such cards as king, knave, nine, eight, three, a careful player would rightly trump with the three and lead the eight. For the time, you do not inform your partner as to number, because the eight is too valuable a card to get rid of, and the information might be purchased too dearly. Also, when about to lead high trumps after a force, there is no occasion to run any risk by trumping with any but the lowest, as the high cards led will of themselves indicate how many trumps you now hold (not how many you held originally). If you take a force with any trump but the lowest, and do not lead a trump, when your lowest is afterwards played it only signifies that you had at least five trumps originally, and your play does not constitute a call for trumps. (_See_ p. 125.)

TRUMPS.

THE MANAGEMENT OF TRUMPS.

The Management of Trumps is, perhaps, the most difficult of the problems presented to the Whist-player. Before discussing the special uses of trumps, it may be observed that in some few hands trumps are led like plain suits, because they are your strongest suit, and you prefer leading them to opening a weak suit. The principles already discussed, which guide us to the most favourable chances for making tricks in a suit, apply to trumps equally with other suits. The privilege, however, enjoyed by the trump suit of winning every other, causes some modifications of detail (noticed at pp. 64-71, and at pp. 85-88); for, since the winning trumps _must_ make tricks, you play a more backward game in the trump suit. Thus, with ace, king, and small trumps, you lead a small one, by which you obtain an increased chance of making tricks in the suit, and you keep the command of it, and must have the lead after the third round, the advantage of which will be presently explained. Even if your partner is so weak in trumps that the opponent wins the first trick very cheaply, but little (if any) harm accrues; for the opponent then has to open a suit up to you or your partner.

In the great majority of hands, trumps are applied to their special uses, viz.: 1. To disarm the opponents, and to prevent their trumping your winning-cards; and 2. To trump the winning cards of the adversaries. In order to comprehend when trumps may be most profitably applied to the first, and when to the second, of these uses, we must first clearly perceive the objects aimed at throughout the hand, viz.: to establish a suit, to exhaust the adversaries' trumps, and to retain the long trump, or a certain winning card with which to get the lead again, for the purpose of bringing in the suit; also to endeavour to obstruct similar designs of the opponents. It follows that you should

13. LEAD TRUMPS WHEN VERY STRONG IN THEM.

It cannot be too strongly impressed that _the primary use of strength in trumps is to draw the adversaries' trumps for the bringing in of your own or your partner's long suit_. With great strength in trumps (five or more), you may proceed at once to disarm the opponents, and lead trumps without waiting to establish a suit. For, with five trumps or more, the chance of your succeeding in drawing the other trumps, and of being left with the long trumps is so considerable, that you may then almost always lead trumps, whatever your other cards. The exceptional hands are principally those which contain five trumps without an honour, and five small cards of a plain suit; or five trumps without an honour, and four middling cards of one plain suit together with four bad cards of another plain suit. But if the adversaries are at the score of three, you should lead a trump with these hands, as your partner must have two honours, or very good cards out of trumps, for you to save the game.

If you are at the score of three, the adversaries being love, one, or two, you should not lead a trump merely because you have five trumps with two honours, if they are unaccompanied by a very strong suit, or by good cards in each suit. For here, if your partner has an honour, you probably win the game in any case; and if he has no honour you open the trump suit to a disadvantage. Some good players, however, do not allow this to be an exceptional case. The turn-up card may sometimes cause you to refrain from leading trumps from five. Thus: you have king, ten, nine, six, and four of spades (trumps); ace, queen, and three small diamonds; and three small hearts. You are four, and the ace of spades is turned up. In the opinion of most players, the ace of diamonds is the best original lead; but, if an ace were not turned up, you should lead a trump.

It is often said, even by pretty good players, "Strength in trumps is no reason for leading them, unless you have a good suit as well." If both you and your partner are devoid of good cards you cannot make tricks; but should your partner hold one good suit out of the three, you will very likely bring it in for him by leading from strength in trumps. For, even if you have a poor hand out of trumps, you will discover in the course of play (_i.e._, by the suits led or discarded by the other players), what your partner's suit is, and will be able to lead it to him each time you get the lead with your long trumps. Besides, if your hand is weak out of trumps, you are placed in the disadvantageous position of leading from a weak suit unless you lead trumps.

You should not be deterred from leading trumps because an honour is turned up to your right, nor necessarily lead them because the same happens to your left; either is proper if the circumstances of the hand require it, but neither otherwise. To illustrate this proposition, take this hand: ace, queen, and three small spades (trumps), three small hearts, three small clubs, and two small diamonds. The king of spades is turned up fourth hand. The best lead is disputed; but the author has no hesitation in advising the lead of a small trump, notwithstanding that there is a certain finesse over the king. A little consideration will render this apparent. By leading the trump suit originally, you obtain the advantages just enumerated, and make the dealer open a suit up to your partner. Your partner, as soon as he gets the lead, will return the trump, and you thus obtain the command of trumps whether the king was forced out in the first round or not.

Bearing in mind the severe consequences of leaving the adversary with the long trump, you must be cautious in leading trumps from less than five; four trumps and a moderate hand not justifying an original trump lead. You should, instead, lead your strong plain suit, and if you establish it, and the adversaries do not meantime show any great strength, as by leading or calling for trumps (pp. 125-127), you may then, with four trumps, mostly venture a trump lead. With strength in trumps you may generally finesse more freely in the second and third rounds of trumps than you would in plain suits. In plain suits an unsuccessful finesse may result in the best card being afterwards trumped, which cannot happen in trumps. Moreover, by finessing, you keep the winning trump, and so obtain the lead after the third round. This is especially important when you have a suit established and but four trumps. Here you should, generally, not merely finesse in the second round, but hold up the winning trump, and sometimes at this juncture refuse to part with it even if the trump lead comes from the adversary.

An example will render this more clear. The leader (A) has ace, and three small trumps, a strong suit, headed by ace, king, queen, and a probable trick, say king and another, in a third suit. A should, in the writer's judgment, lead a trump. If B (A's partner) wins the first trick in trumps, and returns a strengthening trump, A, as a rule, should not part with his ace. When A or B obtain the lead again they play a third round of trumps, which, being won by the ace, enables A, by leading his tierce major, to get a force (_i.e._, to compel one of his adversaries to trump in order to win the trick), in which case nothing short of five trumps in one hand against him can prevent A's bringing in his suit. You must be prepared for similar tactics on the part of the adversaries, and not conclude that they have not the best trump because they suffer you to win the first or second round.

With a well protected hand containing four trumps, two being honours, a trump may be led originally. For here the chance of gaining by the trump lead may be taken as greater than the chance of losing. Thus with queen, knave, and two small trumps, a four suit with an honour, say for example, knave, ten, nine, and a small one, king guarded in the third suit, and queen guarded in the fourth, a small trump if it finds partner with an honour is by no means unlikely to win the game. If partner turns out very weak in trumps the leader must alter his plan, and, instead of continuing the trump lead, play to make three, five or seven tricks according to the fall of the cards in plain suits.

Trump leads, without strength in trumps, can only be right in consequence of some special circumstance in the state of the game, or of the score. For instance, great commanding strength in all the plain suits may call for a trump lead; or it may be necessitated to stop a _cross-ruff_ (_i.e._, the alternate trumping by partners of different suits, each leading the suit in which the other renounces), in which case it is generally advisable to take out two rounds if possible; so with the winning trump you play it out, whatever your others are. Again, if you have a wretched hand and you are love to three or four, you assume that the game is lost, unless your partner is very strong; and if he _is_ very strong, the trump is the best lead for him. This doctrine is frequently carried to excess, as, by concealing your weakness, you often stand a better chance of saving a point, if not the game, than by at once exposing it. If, therefore, you have one four suit, headed by an honour, you would generally do better to choose that.

The trump lead is so much more important than any other that you should almost always return your partner's lead of trumps _immediately_, except he has led from weakness, when you are not bound to return it unless it suits your hand.

If you find one of the adversaries without a trump, you should mostly proceed to establish your long suit, and abstain from drawing two trumps for one; to say nothing of the probability that the adversary who has not renounced is unusually strong in trumps. Besides, when he has the lead, he will very likely lead trumps in order to draw two for one; and it is more advantageous to you that the lead should come from him. On the other hand, if your partner has no trump, it is often right to endeavour to weaken the adversaries by continuing even their trump lead.

It is a common artifice, if you wish a trump to be led, to drop a high card to the adversary's lead, to induce him to believe that you will trump it next round, whereupon the leader will very likely change the suit, and perhaps lead trumps. Thus, if he leads king (from ace, king, and others), and you hold queen and one other, it is evident that you cannot make the queen. If you throw the queen to his king, he may lead a trump to prevent your trumping his ace; but if he goes on with the suit, and you drop your small card, it may fairly be inferred that you have been endeavouring to get him to lead a trump. Your partner should now take the hint, and, if he gets the lead, lead trumps; for if you want them led, it is of little consequence from whom the lead comes. By a conventional extension of this system to lower cards it is understood that, whenever you throw away an _unnecessarily_ high card, it is a sign (after the smaller card drops) that you want trumps led. This is called _asking for trumps_ or _calling for trumps_.

When you ask for trumps, you command your partner to abandon his own game, and to lead a trump; and you promise him, in return, if he has reasonably good cards, either to win the game or to make a considerable score. It has been laid down, that the minimum strength in trumps which justifies you in issuing such an order to your partner is four trumps, two being honours, or five trumps, one being an honour, accompanied by such cards in your own or your partner's suits that you are reasonably secure of not having a suit brought in against you. This rule, however, only applies to an _original_ ask. If you have had the lead, and have not led a trump, or if you have had an opportunity of asking and have not asked, and you then ask for trumps at a later period of the hand, the ask is not a command, like an original one, nor does it necessarily imply the possession of the minimum strength above stated. It merely means that, from the fall of the cards, you consider a trump lead would be very advantageous. For example: you hold ace and a small spade; king, ten, and two small hearts (trumps); queen and two small clubs; and knave, ten and two other diamonds. You lead a small diamond; your partner plays the queen; the fourth hand plays the ace. A small club is now led through you. You should ask for trumps.

When your partner asks for trumps, and you have four or more at the time you obtain the lead, lead the smallest, unless you have the ace, or three honours, or queen, knave, ten; if you have only two or three trumps when you obtain the lead, lead from the highest downwards, whatever they are.

Before answering the ask, be sure that the higher card, previously dropped, is _unnecessarily_ high. For instance a higher card is often played before a lower, to show that you command the suit, or that you hold the intermediate cards, or to get out of your partner's way. It is very important to distinguish between covering second hand and discarding an unnecessarily high card. For example: with knave, ten, and one other (say the three), it is usual to play the ten second hand on a small card. When your three comes down in the next round, it is not an ask for trumps, unless your partner can infer that you do not hold the knave. Moderate players, who know of the ask, never consider this; so with them the choice of the least evil is generally not to cover, for you otherwise run the terrible risk of having a strengthening trump led to you with a weak hand. To ask for trumps, second hand, with knave, ten, and one other, you must play the knave.

When your partner leads a trump, or asks for trumps, if you have numerical strength in trumps, you should ask at the first opportunity. This is called the _echo of the call_, though it is made use of also in response to a lead.

The advantages of the echo are manifold. Your partner being strong in trumps may hesitate to take a force, but your echo enables him to do so without fear, and to persevere with the trump lead. Or, your partner may be in doubt after the second round of trumps as to the policy of playing a third. But if he can count two more trumps in your hand he will be directed. Thus: eight are out, your partner has three more; you have echoed. He will know that the other two are in your hand, and will not draw two for none, as without the echo, he might do.

The negative advantage of the echo should not be overlooked. Thus: to take the same case of eight trumps being out, and the leader with three more trumps. You (his partner) have had the chance of sounding an echo, but have not done so. The leader knows that you have not both the remaining trumps, and he will regulate his game accordingly.

To your partner's trump lead you echo in the trump suit; the same if partner calls, and you are forced. Thus: you have eight, seven, five, two of trumps; your left-hand adversary leads king, ace of a suit of which you only hold one. Your partner calls. You echo, by trumping with the five, and you then lead the eight. On the second round of trumps, when your deuce falls, the echo is completed. Your partner knows that you have one more trump, either the six or the seven. If you had not echoed, he might not be able to tell for certain whether you hold another trump or not. (_See_ Hands XXXIV., XXXV.)

If you have four trumps and are forced, and your partner then leads or asks for trumps, you should echo, notwithstanding that you no longer have numerical strength. This case can best be illustrated by an example. (_See_ Hand XXXVI.)

* * * * *

The use of strength in trumps being to disarm the opponents, it follows that you should as much as possible husband your strength for that purpose. Therefore when second player,

14. DO NOT TRUMP A DOUBTFUL CARD IF STRONG IN TRUMPS.

By a doubtful card is meant a card of a suit of which your partner _may_ have the best.

Whether you should trump or refuse to trump a doubtful card depends almost entirely on your strength in trumps. It has already been mentioned that it is an advantage to trump when you are weak, for you thus make a little trump, which is not available for the other uses of trumps, and which, if not used for trumping, will presently be drawn by the strong hand. It is conversely a disadvantage to trump a doubtful card when you are strong in trumps, for by trumping you weaken your numerical power, and diminish the probability of your bringing in a suit. If, instead of trumping, you throw away a losing card, you inform your partner that you have strength in trumps, and also, by your discard, what your strong suit is; and if your partner has any strength in the suit led, you leave him in a favourable position.

If you refuse to overtrump, or to trump a certain winning card, your partner should conclude either that you have no trump, or more probably four trumps and a powerful hand besides. If he concludes that you are reserving your trumps to bring in a suit, he should assist you by leading trumps as soon as he can. A refusal to be thus forced is seldom requisite if you have more than four trumps; with six you are mostly strong enough to trump and to lead trumps; with five you may do the same, if your suit is established; but if not, it is generally best to take the force, and to lead your suit.

The situations in which it is most necessary to refuse to overtrump your right-hand adversary, or to refuse to trump a winning card, occur when you have four trumps and a very strong suit, or a suit established early in a hand. For then, by trumping, you prejudice your chance of bringing in the suit in order to secure one trick. By refusing to part with a trump in these cases, you obtain the advantages just enumerated, at the time when they are most likely to become of service; and, where you refuse to overtrump, your adversary is left with one trump less, by which your hand is strengthened.

Many players run into the extreme of always refusing to be forced by a winning card when they are strong in trumps. The situations, however, just indicated, are almost the only ones in which it answers to hold up; and these even are liable to several exceptions. For instance:--1. You should not persist in refusing to be forced if you find that the adversary has the entire command of his suit. 2. You should not refuse if your partner evidently intends to force you; and, 3. You should not refuse to overtrump if you have reason to believe that your left-hand adversary is strong in trumps.

With an untaught partner it is useless to refuse to trump; he will not understand it, but will continue to force you. With such, the best course is rather to make tricks when you can than to play for a great game.

* * * * *

From what has just been said, it is evidently an advantage to

15. FORCE A STRONG TRUMP HAND OF THE ADVERSARY.

For you thereby take the best chance of preventing his making use of his trumps for bringing in a suit. If he refuses to take a force, keep on giving it to him.

For instance, if he passes your king (led from king, queen, &c.), and the king wins, continue the suit, and so on. Some players can never be brought to understand this; they do not like to see their winning cards trumped, and therefore frequently change their suit or even lead trumps when an adversary refuses to be forced.

It now hardly requires to be stated that it is bad play intentionally to force a weak adversary, and still worse to lead a suit to which both adversaries renounce, as the weak will trump and the strong get rid of a losing card.

* * * * *

If you have numerical strength in trumps, you are justified in forcing your partner, relying on your own strength to disarm the opponents. But

16. DO NOT FORCE YOUR PARTNER IF YOU ARE WEAK IN TRUMPS.

For you thus weaken him, and leave it in the power of the antagonists to draw all the trumps, and bring in their suit. If, then, a good partner refrains from forcing you, you may be sure he is weak; on the other hand, if he evidently _intends_ to force you (as by leading a losing card of a suit he knows you must trump), you may assume that he is strong in trumps, and you should take the force willingly, even though you do not want to be forced, depending on his strength to exhaust the adversaries' trumps.

You may, however, though weak, force your partner under these circumstances. 1. When he has already shown a desire to be forced, or weakness in trumps, as by trumping a doubtful card, or by refraining from forcing you. 2. When you have a cross-ruff, which secures several tricks at once, and is therefore often more advantageous than trying to establish a suit. 3. Sometimes when you are playing a close game, as for the odd trick, and often when one trick saves or wins the game or a point. And 4. Sometimes when great strength in trumps has been declared against you.

If your partner leads a thirteenth card, or a card of a suit in which he knows that both you and the fourth player renounce, your play must depend on your partner's strength in trumps. If he is strong, he wants you to put on your best trump, either to make the trumps separately, or to force out one or two high ones, to leave himself with the command. If he is weak in trumps, he wants you to pass the card, that the fourth player may obtain the lead, and lead up to your hand. No general rule can be given as to the course to be pursued with regard to thirteenth cards. You must judge of the leader's intention by the score and the previous fall of the cards.

PLAYING TO THE BOARD.

17. PLAY TO THE SCORE;

AND

18. WATCH THE FALL OF THE CARDS, AND DRAW YOUR INFERENCES AT THE TIME.

These two all-important principles have already been mentioned as causing differences in the play. The commonest form in which the former is presented to us is this: at the score of Love-all five tricks save the game against two by honours. It is often right, therefore, when two by honours have been declared against you, to go for the fifth trick by leading off a winning card, or by putting one on second or third hand.

To explain further what is meant by playing to the score, put yourself in this situation. Four trumps remain in, the adversaries have two winning trumps, it being uncertain whether they are in one hand or divided; you have the two losing trumps, two forcing cards, and the lead; you can only play correctly by referring to the score. Thus, if the adversary is at four, and you have won five, or even six tricks, your game would be to secure two tricks by forcing; for if you play a trump and the two against you are in the same hand, you lose the game. But suppose you are at the point of two, and the adversaries are not at four, and you have won six tricks, your game would be to risk the trump; for if you bring down the other trumps you win the game; but by playing to force you make certain of scoring only four. By applying this mode of reasoning you will often be directed as to a finesse late in a hand. (Further illustrations of playing to the score occur in the hands.)

For simple examples of drawing inferences at the time of the fall of the cards take the following:--1. You lead a small card from ace, knave, &c.; your partner wins with the queen; you should _immediately_ (_i.e._, before another card is led) infer that the king cannot be with your right-hand adversary. Hence, on the return of the suit, you would not finesse the knave. 2. You are second player, and a suit is led in which you have king, ten, and one small one. You play the small one. The third hand plays the queen, which is won with the ace. You should _at once_ infer that the third hand cannot have the knave, and that you may safely finesse the ten next round.

You will greatly assist your memory by systematically recording inferences in the above manner. In addition to this you should apply your knowledge of the principles to noting important points, not attempting too much at first. Begin by counting the trumps as they fall, and notice, at all events, the honours, and remember the turn-up card. By degrees you will find yourself able to recollect the ten and nine, and then the smaller trumps. Next attend to the suit led originally by each player, and watch in the second round whether the lead was from strength or weakness. Try also to remember the fall of the cards in your own strong suit, that you may know when it is established. Beyond this, experience will enable you to judge what to retain and what to reject in each hand; so that, with practice, you will acquire what may be termed _whist memory_ which will enable you, without any great effort, to recollect the principal features of every hand.

The fall of the cards may, one time or another, modify nearly every rule of play. A player who simply follows rule, and fails to grasp the situations in which rule should be departed from, is a mere machine without intelligence. General principles only apply to the general case; to apply them to particular cases, observation, inference, and judgment are essential. Thus, in the Analysis of Leads, it appears that the card which should be led in trumps often differs from the card which should be led in plain suits. The reason is given at p. 119. But it will be clear to any one who reads between the lines, that plain suits should be led like trumps, if all the remaining trumps are in the leader's or his partner's hands; or, if all the trumps are out, and the leader or his partner has certain cards of re-entry in other suits.

As another example, take the case of returned leads. A leads a small card; the second hand plays a small card; B (third hand) puts on the eight; the fourth hand wins with the queen. When B gets the lead he returns the knave. It is evident that B must have the ten and the nine. Here two principles appear to conflict. One rule is, with four originally return the smallest; the other rule is convey information to your partner. When a player has thus to choose between two rules, he must use his intelligence, in order to decide under which rule his greater advantage lies. In the example given, the return of the knave cannot deceive partner as to the number of cards held in the suit; if he takes the trouble to think, he will at once perceive that the rule as to returned leads has been departed from, in order to convey information.

* * * * *

The three following Examples further illustrate cases where playing to the board is involved.

CASE I.

Score: AB, three; YZ, four. Spades trumps.

AB have six tricks and have played two by honours. It is known from the fall of the cards that A has no trump; also that Z has the long diamond. A to lead.

* * * * *

THE PLAY AND REMARKS.--A leads a small club. Y puts on the ace second hand. In order to save (and win) the game, Y and his partner must win every trick (see statement of score and of fall of the cards). Y sees that to do this Z must have two of the three remaining trumps. This being so, Z can have but one club, and Y therefore puts on the ace of clubs second hand.

For other illustrations _see_ Hands VIII and XV.

CASE II.

Score: AB want two tricks to save the game. Hearts trumps. A to lead.

A knows Y to have the best heart; also B to have the best diamond and weak spades.

* * * * *

THE PLAY AND REMARKS.--A leads the queen of spades, and then the losing trump. A takes the only chance of winning two tricks. To accomplish this Y must hold one spade and one diamond, as will appear by placing the unknown cards in any other way. A therefore plays on the assumption that Y holds a spade and a diamond in addition to the trump which is declared in his hand.

* * * * *

For another illustration of leading a losing trump to place the lead _see_ Hand XXXV.

CASE III.

It is the duty of a player to make the game as easy to his partner as he can. The play often depends on the sort of partner. For example:--you lead the ten from king, queen, knave, ten, only, or from king, knave, ten, &c. Suppose the lead to be from the former combination, and that your ten forces the ace from the fourth hand. You obtain the lead again. The proper lead now is the queen. (_See_ Analysis of Leads, p. 67). But, with an indifferent partner, the better lead is the king, as he may not have drawn the correct inference from the first lead, and knowing the queen is not the best, he may trump it.

However good your partner may be, you should not put him into unnecessary difficulties. For example:--

Spades trumps. Y can count two hearts, and queen, ten of spades in A's hand, and a small spade in Z's hand. A to lead.

THE PLAY AND REMARKS.--A leads the seven of hearts. Y should put on the king, though certain of being able to win with the nine. For, if Y wins with the nine, he compels Z to play a coup, viz., to trump the best heart, in order to get the lead through the queen, ten of spades; but, if Y wins with the king and leads the losing heart, it requires no ingenuity on Z's part to trump it.

COUPS.

There is no Whist principle which should not be occasionally violated, owing to the knowledge of the hands derived from inference during the play. Some of the more frequent of the cases, _where a general rule can be given for departing from rule_, may advantageously close this Section.

LEADING FROM WEAKEST SUIT.

It is advisable in most cases where the game is desperate, and where it is clear that your partner must be strong in your weak suit to save the game, to lead your weakest suit, notwithstanding Principle 1 (p. 56). Your partner should finesse deeply in the suit you lead him, and should not return it, but, actuated by motives similar to yours, should lead his weakest suit, in which you should finesse deeply, and continue your weak suit, and so on.

For example: AB (partners) lead trumps. They win the first three tricks, and show four by honours, and three more trumps remain in A's hand. Consequently, if AB win another trick, they win the game. Y or Z now has the lead for the first time. _His lead should be from his weakest suit_, on this principle: if his partner has not the command of it, or a successful finesse in it, the game is lost. Say Y leads, and Z wins the trick. Z should not return Y's lead, but should similarly lead his weakest suit.

* * * * *

For an illustration of this coup, _see_ Hand XXVII.

TREATING LONG SUITS LIKE SHORT ONES, AND VICE VERSÂ.

It often happens towards the end of a hand, that an unplayed suit, of which the leader holds (say) four cards, can only go round twice, _e.g._, there may be two trumps left in in one of the opponents' hands. In such a case, if your suit is headed by queen or knave, you should treat it as a suit of two cards only, and lead your highest, as this gives the best chance of making two tricks in the suit.

* * * * *

In the reverse case, where a suit can only go round once, it is obvious that a small card should be led, so as not to tempt partner to finesse. Thus, holding queen and one small card of an unplayed suit, which you are about to lead, all the opponents' cards but one being winning cards, the proper lead is the small card.

* * * * *

For an illustration _see_ Hand XXII.

* * * * *

There is another case, known as _Deschapelles' coup_, where the proper card to lead is not determined by the leader's numerical power in the suit. It is this: all the adversaries' and partner's trumps are exhausted, and the leader's partner remains with an established suit. If the leader (not having any of his partner's suit left) is obliged to open a fresh suit headed by king, queen, or knave, he should lead the highest card, irrespective of the number of cards he holds in the suit, that being the best chance of subsequently procuring the lead for his partner in case his only card of entry in that suit should be an honour, not the ace.

* * * * *

For an illustration of this coup, _see_ Hand XXVIII.

* * * * *

Deschapelles' coup often succeeds in practice, but it may generally be defeated by an attentive player. When the above-described position of the cards occurs, the adversary, if he has the ace of the fresh suit led, should not put it on first round. The suit will, in all probability, be continued with a low card, when the third player will most likely be compelled to play his highest, which will be taken by the ace; and, having lost the card of re-entry, he never brings in his suit, unless he gets the lead in some other way.

REFUSING TO WIN THE SECOND ROUND OF A SUIT.

This is a case of by no means infrequent occurrence. For example: one of the adversaries has a long suit declared in his favour, which is led a second time. Only one trump remains in, which is in the hand of the second or fourth player. As a rule, the second round of the suit should not be trumped. The third round will probably exhaust the adverse hand, which is numerically weak in the suit. If it so happens that the player who is numerically strong in it has no card of re-entry in any other suit, he will then never bring in his long suit, as his partner, whose hand is exhausted, cannot lead it again, should he get the lead after the third round. If there is a card of re-entry in the hand of the player who has numerical strength, he must bring in the suit, whether the second round is trumped or not.

_See_ Hand XXIX for an illustration of this position.

A similar rule applies, but less frequently, when one adversary has the long trumps, and his partner a long suit nearly established.

For an illustration of this position, _see_ Hand XXX.

DECLINING TO DRAW THE LOSING TRUMP.

When all the trumps are out but two, and the leader remains with the best trump, the losing trump being in the hand of his adversary, the natural and obvious play is to draw the last trump.

But there is a class of cases in which the trump should not be drawn as a matter of course, viz., if one adversary has a long suit established, and his partner has a card of that suit to lead.

The case usually happens in this way: YZ (partners) lead a suit, and after two rounds establish it. They then lead trumps from a suit of four trumps (_see_ p. 123). Eleven trumps come out, and A (YZ's adversary) has the lead and the best trump, one of the opponents having the losing trump. The question then arises, Should A draw the trump?

A should draw the trump if he has also an established suit; or, if B (A's partner) has an established suit, and A can put the lead into B's hand. For, in these two cases, A or B cannot do better than bring in their suit. Again, A should draw the trump, if the adversary who has a suit established (say Z) has also the losing trump, for then, if either Y or Z has a card of re-entry in either of the other two suits, Z cannot be prevented from bringing in his established suit. Lastly, A should draw the trump if Y (Z's partner) has the losing trump, and Z has, declared in his hand, two cards of re-entry. The last case may be dismissed as of but little practical use, as, at the time when A has to decide whether he will draw the trump, he will seldom know enough about the remaining cards to be positive that Z has two cards of re-entry.

In the above cases, A, by not drawing the trump, makes his adversaries a present of a trick.

On the other hand, A should not draw the trump if one opponent (Z) has an established suit, which Y (Z's partner) can lead, the losing trump being in Y's hand. And, it is especially incumbent on A not to draw the trump, if either he or his partner has a suit which will probably be established by leading it, and if A can infer from the fall of the cards that Y has _only one card_ of his partner's established suit in his hand, subject, of course, to the qualifications already noted.

The point aimed at in not drawing the trump, is, first to get the commanding card of A's or B's long suit out of the adverse hand. Y or Z thus obtains the lead, and continues the established suit, which A trumps with the winning trump. If, now, Z has no card of re-entry in the fourth--or unopened--suit, he never brings in his established suit, Y not having another card of it to lead.

The case is difficult to carry when stated thus generally; for an illustration, _see_ Hand XXXI.

REFUSING TO OVERTRUMP.

Cases often happen where it is not advisable to overtrump. Most of these depend on the fall of the cards and on inferences from the play (_see_ Hands XXIII, XXIV), and cannot be generalised. But there is one case in which it is _never right_ to overtrump, viz., when three cards remain in each hand, and one player holds the second and third best trumps, with one of which he trumps the card led. If the player to his left has the best and fourth best trumps, he can never gain anything by overtrumping, and may lose a trick, as the following example shows:--

The position of the trumps (spades) is known. A leads a heart, B trumps it. If Z overtrumps he loses the other two tricks, but if he throws the ace of diamonds he wins the other two tricks.

This rule for not overtrumping cannot be laid down absolutely when there are more than three cards in hand; but when only four trumps remain in, second and third best against best and fourth, it is so frequently advisable not to overtrump, that the player should consider well the position of the remaining cards before overtrumping.

* * * * *

For an illustration of this case, _see_ Hand XXV.

* * * * *

Since it is so often right not to overtrump under these circumstances, it follows that when the case arises the player who holds second and third best should, as a rule, attempt to defeat the coup by playing a false card--_i.e._, he should trump with the higher card in hopes of deceiving his left hand opponent as to the position of the third best trump.

THROWING HIGH CARDS TO PLACE THE LEAD.

This coup presents itself in a variety of forms; the following are selected as likely to be of use.

Whenever you are left at the end of a hand with the tenace in trumps (either best and third best, or second best guarded) over the player to your right, and two other cards, both being cards of the suit led by him, you, second hand, should _always_ throw the highest card of his lead to that trick. You can never lose by so doing, and may win. For example: you have nine and five of the suit led. Throw the nine. For, in the second round of the suit, it may so happen that you get the lead with the nine. If the cards lie thus, for instance:--

Y has the tenace in hearts (trumps) over A. A leads ace of clubs. If Y does not throw the nine, and Z plays carelessly and fails to win Y's nine in the next round, YZ lose a trick. Of course, Z ought to win the second round, but it is Y's duty to render it impossible for Z not to do so (_see_ Remarks on making it easy to Partner, p. 139).

The typical example of this coup is the case where the leader plays the ace, and the second player has king guarded, as in the following example:--

Spades trumps. There are only four spades in, and Y knows that A has the king, ten. B's and Z's cards are immaterial.

A leads the ace of diamonds. If Y plays the two of diamonds he can only make two tricks; but, if he throws the king to the ace, he still makes two tricks, and, if his partner has the queen of diamonds, he makes three tricks.

* * * * *

This coup may be similarly played in plain suits. For an illustration _see_ Hand XXXII.

The following fine coup (which occurred in actual play) exemplifies a similar, but more complicated, case:--

Score: YZ require every trick. Hearts trumps. It is known that the trumps lie between B and Z.

A leads a club; Y and B play small clubs. Z, knowing that B holds the second best trump guarded, takes the only chance of saving the game, by winning the first trick in clubs with the ace, and returning the queen. Y, seeing his partner's anxiety to get rid of the lead, rightly conjectures him to hold the major tenace in trumps. He, therefore, wins his partner's queen of clubs with the king, and saves the game.

It being known that the remaining trumps lie between B and Z, Y would be right to win the second round of clubs under all circumstances of the score.

For another illustration of this coup, _see_ Hand XXXIII.

On a similar principle, the leader not infrequently leads a losing plain card, or a losing trump, at the end of a hand, in order to place the lead. For illustrations, _see_ Case II, p. 138, and Hands XVI, XVII, and XXXV.

THE GRAND COUP.

The _Grand Coup_ consists in throwing away a superfluous trump. At the first glance it appears impossible to have a superabundance of trumps; but cases sometimes happen where a player has _a trump too many_. To get rid of this trump--as by undertrumping a trick already trumped by your partner, or by trumping a trick which he has won, or which you know he may win--is to play the _grand coup_.

The opportunity for playing the _grand coup_ generally happens in this way. Two rounds of trumps come out, leaving five trumps in, two in the hand of (say) B, and three in the hand of Z (the player to his left). If B has the best and third best trumps, or the second best guarded, and trumps are not led again, nor used for trumping, it is clear that at the eleventh trick Z must obtain the lead, and must lead up to the tenace in trumps. If, before the eleventh trick, Z trumps a trick of his partner's (or, in the case of only seven trumps coming out in two rounds, undertrumps a trick already trumped by his partner), and the lead at the eleventh trick can thus be kept in--or put into--Z's partner's hand, the _grand coup_ comes off, as in the following example:--

Clubs trumps. Z knows that B has ten and another trump. A leads the ten of diamonds; Y trumps with the six of clubs; Z undertrumps with the five. If he retains his three trumps, and B refuses to trump the queen of spades next led by Y, Z loses a trick in clubs.

The opportunity for playing the _grand coup_ is often missed. A player should always be on the look-out for it when he has five trumps, especially if a trump is led to his right. It should be added also, that if the player who attempts it retains a high card in his hand, he may be just as badly off as though he remained with three trumps. Thus, holding three trumps against two, and ace and another card of another suit, it is not sufficient that he disposes of one of his trumps; he should also get rid of his ace (_see_ Remarks on Throwing High Cards to place the Lead, pp. 147-151). The following example will render this more clear:--

Hearts trumps. B has already got rid of his superfluous trump. A leads the eight of clubs. B should throw the ace of diamonds to it. For, if B has the lead after the next trick, he might just as well have kept his third trump. If A has the king of diamonds, B wins a trick by discarding the ace; and, if A has not the king, B loses nothing by throwing the ace.

An exception to this rule is when A has winning cards to go on with. Thus, if A had another club, B need not discard the ace of diamonds. This is too obvious to require working out.

* * * * *

The following is another aspect under which the _grand coup_ may present itself:--

Hearts trumps. It is known that B has king, queen, knave of trumps, and a losing spade or club--but uncertain which.

A leads the knave of diamonds. B trumps it.

Z should throw away a small trump, undertrumping B in order to keep two winning queens. If he discards a queen, he must do so at random, and perhaps throw away the suit of which B has the small one. By discarding his useless trump (which B would proceed to draw) he defers parting with either queen till after the next round, when the fall of the cards may assist him. B now leads a trump, and Y discards the losing club. B then leads another trump, and Z now knows that he ought to keep the spade. This case actually occurred in the presence of the writer, but Z, instead of undertrumping, discarded the wrong queen at random, and eventually lost the rubber in consequence.

* * * * *

For further illustrations of the _Grand Coup_, _see_ Hands XXXVIII and XXXIX.

* * * * *

If the foregoing principles are reflectively perused, it will be seen that they mould the Theory of Whist into a harmonious whole. The Theory of Whist tells you how to play your own hand to the greatest advantage, how to assist your partner, and how to weaken and to obstruct your opponents; in short, it teaches how to take the best chance of making the greatest number of tricks. This knowledge constitutes a _sound_ player. If to theoretical perfection you add the power of accurate observation, and of acute perception, together with a thorough comprehension of the whist capacities of partners and of opponents, you have all the elements necessary to form a Master of the Science.