The San Francisco call., 1896-08-30
{. .E::EE .RNE|;a1!g||:zlHHE;:;|;;;i E|;a1!g| !, J

do not force your partner when you are
weak in trumps" is generally accepted rule
that is honored in the breaking far too often.
1t may usually be broken with advantage
when partner has shown weakness, has ruffed
a doubtful trick, or has otherwise shown
wish to be forced; for failure to force partner
then would complete display of weakness
that adversaries would soon use TO their ad-
vantage. That he ruffs the adversaries' win
ming card does not, however, imply desire
to be forced again. How few players consider
an instant before plunging into the in
toxicating delights of a cross ruff. Yet often
it is short lived delusion and
snare that gives the opponents their only
chance TO exhaust your trumps and bring In
long suit. Suppose your second nand play the
ace on the lead of queen and your partner is
void or drops the king. If you also are void
of one suit cross ruff is at hand and yet you
must not force your partner without careful
consideration. He has twelve cards divided
among three suits and that he has fonr
trumps is fair presumption. To force him
now may be the sole preventive OF bringing
in his long suit, probably the one In which
you are short. Whenever you find your part
ner with q singleton or none of one suit early
in the hand you may well hesitate about fore
ing him and ask yourself the question: Should
not lead trump
opponent opens the hand with the ace OF
plain suit. your partner throws king; with
any four trumps you should lead trumps at
your first opportunity. Such a situation de-
mands trump lead in nearly every in
stance"
The general rule we are discussing is not to
be disregarded simply because an opponent
calls for or leads a trump, perhaps fearing an
impending ruff. If you are very weak in
ma hos inst much
chance of strength A force may be ruinous.
IT, instead, you can force the stronger trump
hand of the adversaries and otherwise protect
your partners trumps the shoe may be placed
on the other foot and the trumps be exhausted
to the end that partners or your
long suit is established instead of that
of the opponents and they are left with
the sad reflection that they have sowed the
wind and reaped the whirlwind. If great
trump strength is declared against you so that
it is altogether improba BILE that your partner
can defend the suit he may, of course, be
forced with impunity.
we have not meant to imply in these remarks
that you should force your partner when you
are weak in trumps, but that you should not
do so unhesitatingly, even though he has
taken force once; even though you have
cross ruff; even though some trump strength
is declared against you. Barring the possi-
bility of partner being overtrumped by fourth
hand he has a sure trick, and a sure trick is
not to be refused without reason.
Careful consideration must be given to the
situation whenever the matter of forcing part
ner arises to assure yourself that too much
danger does not lurk behind the sure trick,
and generally 1t will be found best to force q
trump from the strong adverse hand or lead
strengthening card in partners suit. 1t is un-
wise to play fast and loose with as good con-
ventional play as this. If partner knows that
you respect the convention he can take the
force and with confidence lead trumps or play
otherwise, as seems best; while If he knows
that you are likely to offer the force whether
you are strong or weak he may, with disas-
trous results, refuse to trump.
WHISTLES.
John T. Mitchell gives the following new
system of leads, with the remark that 1t is re-
ferred to the committee on play for considera-
ton:
Now that the adoption of the ten lead from
queen-knave-ten has become almost general,
and in view of the fact that the knave is con-
sidered the proper lead from king-queen-
knave and the queen the proper lead from ace
king-queen, ii seems to me that the committee
which was appointed at the last congress to
formulate q code of leads and follows for
recommendation to the league should consider
the advisability of revising the table of Amerl-
can leads in con nformity with a general rule
such as the following:
With three or more cards in sequence, the
lowest of which is not below ten, lead the third
from the top.
With only two honors in sequence, both
higher than the knave, lead the higher. With
ace, queen, knave, lead ace; follow with queen
to show four, knave to show five or more.
Without any high card holding as good as
either of the above, lead your fourth best caro-
If the above rule adopted it would do
away with the ten lead from king-knave-ten
and the ace lead from ace and four or more
small; but as these leads have virtually been
abandoned already the new rule would not in
terfere with the general mode of play in that
respect.
The new rule, however, would make q radi-
cal change in one respect, viz: in the lead of
the queen to show five or more in suit and
the lead of the king to show exactly four, and
that is where the principal objection to the
proposed change will come in. However, ac-
cording to some authorities whose opinion is
shared by quite number of experts the num-
Der of small cards shown by lead is not so
important as the exact strength displayed,
and there is no question as to the superiority
of the proposed change in the latter respect
The lead OF the ace would proclaim the king
or queen-knave, the lead of the king would
proclaim the queen, the queen would proclaim
king and ace, the knaye would show the
queen and king and the ten the knave and
queen. Each OF the high cards from the ace
down 20 the ten, with the exception of the
ace, would proclaim certain holding: and as
the ace usually wins the next lead would
clear away all uncertainty in regard to that
also.
The high Indifferent cards left in hand after