Whist is a game that has been played during so many years, and has occupied
the attention of so many clear-headed men, that certain principles of play
have been established from long experience, as those best suited to gain
success.
The first step towards becoming a good whist-player is to learn the leads;
then what to play second and third in hand. These systems of play ought to
be so thoroughly known that there is never a moment's hesitation as to the
card to lead, or the card to play second or third in hand.
The leads, &c., are merely what we may term {186} the mechanical portions
of the game, and do not require any reasoning on the part of the player.
They have already been reasoned out by long and continued investigation.
Immediately other cards have been played by the adversaries and the
partner, then reason and judgment come in, so as to draw inferences from
the cards played by each individual.
The object of a lead is--first, to secure tricks; secondly, to give your
partner as much information as is desirable of the cards which you possess
in the suit you have led. You may give him a very fair idea of the
numerical strength or of the actual strength in high or court cards. It is
always correct to assume that a partner, if even a moderately good player,
leads from his strongest suit. Then comes the question, Of what does this
suit consist? By the card led, an approximate idea is conveyed. By the
cards played by the other players compared with those held in one's own
hand, a more accurate opinion may be formed. A second round of the same
suit often indicates exactly the cards held by the original leader. Such a
conclusion, however, could be formed only when the original leader is a
whist-player, and is not one of those persons who lead at random, according
as their fancy at the time impels them.
In considering the lead, the selection, as a general rule, should be from
the strongest suit, and the strongest suit is that consisting of the
greatest number of cards. Thus five spades, consisting of knave, nine,
eight, four, and two, is a stronger suit than is another consisting of
king, queen, and one small card.
What card to lead of the strong suit is the next question, one object being
to convey to the partner as much useful information as is possible. Two
{187} forms of lead now come under consideration, viz., first, when the
cards led are winning cards of the suit; second, when the cards led are not
winning cards. Winning cards will first be spoken of.
Suppose a player led the ace of clubs. His partner would at once be
justified in concluding that the original leader did not hold the king of
that suit; and if this ace were trumped by the fourth player, the partner
would place the king in the hand of the original second player. If,
however, the king had been led originally, and had been similarly trumped,
it would be right to conclude that the ace was in the hand of the original
leader.
Again, if the king of a suit were led, and won the trick, and the queen
were led, and also won, the ace would be placed in the hand of the original
leader. If, however, the king had been led originally, and followed by the
ace, then the queen would be placed by the leader's partner in the hand of
one of the adversaries.
These simple cases serve to show the general principle on which leads
should be made. The first lead gives a preliminary indication; the second
lead reveals the whole or nearly the whole secret.
This being the case, it is most remarkable to find that there are certain
persons at the present time who claim to be reasonable, and to play
scientific Whist, who yet strongly object to any extension of the
principles of leads beyond those to which they have been accustomed. These
objectors admit that to lead the king, with ace, king, is correct play, as
the lead of the king indicates that the leader holds the ace also. They
stop, however, at a certain point, and assert that to lead the penultimate
from {188} a suit of five, an anti-penultimate from a suit of six, to call
for trumps, or to echo to a partner's lead of trumps, is like kicking your
partner under the table. Why is it not like kicking your partner under the
table to lead the king, with ace, king, instead of leading the ace? The
cases are exactly similar, and are based on the same principles of play.
The whist-player who wishes to hold his own with modern players _must_
learn the modern leads. These leads are based on reason, and convey, by
each card, intimation to an intelligent partner as regards the number and
strength of the suit from which the card was originally led.
As one among many examples of the information conveyed by a lead, the
following may be given:--
My partner being a good player, I conclude he leads from his strongest
suit. He is original leader, and leads the seven of spades, hearts being
trumps.
In my hand there are the ace, queen, five, and two of spades.
The second player plays the three; I play the queen; fourth player plays
the six.
What do these cards mean?
My right adversary is not asking for trumps, because asking for trumps is
playing an unnecessarily high card (as will be fully explained further on);
and the two of spades being in my own hand, the three is the next lowest
card. The three may be a single card, but single cards are the exception
oftener than the rule.
Having won with the queen, I return the ace of spades. The second player
plays the eight, my partner plays the four, and the fourth player plays the
ten. {189}
By these two rounds of spades I have obtained a considerable amount of
information. My partner led the seven, and his four dropped to my ace on
the second round. He therefore led the penultimate of a five suit; and he
holds three more spades which I can name--that is, the king, knave, and
nine. Neither of the adversaries holds another spade, because, as there are
two more in my hand, three more in my partner's, and eight spades played,
the thirteen of the suit are accounted for. To lead another spade,
therefore, would be folly, as one adversary would make a small trump, and
the other would discard a worthless card of another suit.
My partner also would know that--as the eight was played by one adversary,
and the ten by the other, whilst he held king, knave, and nine--the two
other spades were in my hand.
When, then, my partner obtained the lead, he would avoid playing his king
of spades, unless all the trumps were out, or he wished to force out the
best trump.
A bad player distinguishes himself by not noticing such details as those
given above, and then, by jumping at erroneous conclusions, comes to utter
grief. A bad player would not perceive why a third round of spades was not
led by his partner, and would almost to a certainty imagine that it must be
because his partner held no more. At the very first opportunity, therefore,
he would lead his king of spades, and then discover that the second player
trumped with the two, and the fourth player discarded from another suit.
Now, how was this information obtained? It was obtained by the original
leader starting from a {190} penultimate, or lowest card but one of a five
suit. If this original leader had led the lowest card his partner could not
have obtained the information described above.
To lead, therefore, the correct card, according to the number and strength
of a suit, is one of the first and most important items connected with
Whist.
In the most modern game of Whist the number of conventional leads has been
considerably increased; and, although only a few of the more advanced
players practise these at the present time, those who do so must be
reckoned with. It is, therefore, necessary for a player to ascertain the
amount of knowledge of the game possessed and practised by his partner,
otherwise he may be giving information as to the cards in his hand which
his partner fails to comprehend, but which is at once understood by the
adversaries.
If the chance be offered, the game of the players who are playing should be
watched, so as to ascertain whether they are modern or old-fashioned
players. This fact can be discovered by noting the cards they lead. When
joining a rubber with strangers, it is uncertain what style of game they
play, and the first hand is played under great disadvantage. After two or
three hands have been played, a partner's strength or weakness ought to be
correctly estimated.
If you find that your partner does not understand the scientific game, it
is worse than useless to attempt to play first-class Whist with him. He
fails to perceive the information you give him, or draws erroneous
conclusions from such information, and does the very thing he ought not to
do. With a bad partner and {191} strong adversaries, it is more likely that
success will be gained by playing incorrect cards than by playing those
which, with a good partner, would have been played.
Having thus, we hope, established the importance of the lead, we proceed to
discuss the subject in detail.