Wheeling Sunday register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1882-1934, 1900-10-14
THE WHIST TABLE.
WHAT Is sHORT-sUTT wHIsTs-AN-
ALYsIs of HANDS, SHOWING
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
SHORT AND LONG-SUIT
HANDS-MR. HOWELL'S
OPINION ON THE
SUBJECT.


long-suit contingent were much cha
grined because they were accused OF ex-
perimenting with the short-suit game.
This makes one ask the question. What
is short-suit whist? and the only posi-
BILE answer Is, a game of no intelligence
and one played by people of no whist
ability, being devoid of whist tactics
and without any element Of whist STRAIT
egy."
1t is not surprising a conservative
player becomes annoyed when told he is
playing such a game. 1t is, however,
the fault of the short-suit writers them
selves that the game they really mean
has fallen into disrepute and is often
COMPOUNDED with the insensate form
less thing Of a few years ago. An anal
ysis of the two games will show tnat
the best elements in both styles OF
whist are striving for the same end, the
taking of as many tricks as possible,
although thai result is reached by diff
ferent methods. That the long-suit
game is based upon sound reasoning
and is the system universally in use by
the majority of good players all fair
minded persons will agree. The point
at issue is how these games differ and
to what extent. 1t would surprise
many whist students to be told that the
game to-day advocated by Howell, the
prince of short-suit writer's, Is in many
essentials the anne as that approved
by j. T. Mitchell, tie great Chicago ex-
pert. The fundamental principle to
which they a1.ere in their writings
is that of the long suit, although the
tactics advocated to bring about this
result differ to a certain extent. If any
one were asked to name the style of
game advocated by Howell and Street,
they would at oHce reply the short-suit
game, and they would be wrong even if
these authorities agreed with them.
Mr.. Street, in his little brochure on
the game, says: With four trumps,
including three honors and any other
strength, the trump is the best lead.
Without three honorS do not lead
trumps originally unless with very
good cards to make the suits" Again:
With few exceptions the system of
trump leads In nearly the same as that
described in the long,suit game" Now,
if, as is the common belief concerning
this game, the essential point
struggled for is the ruff" as the writ
ings of the minor short-suiters would
lead n to believe, the greatest dis
similarity instead of the closest re-
semblance would be found in the man.
agement of the trumps themselves.
What is the possible object of getting
out the trumps unless to make the long
suit? A noted New York short-suit
writer, on the same subject, says:
ffINi rct fho c,i4 1919 - o14o
second, it must be defended. Then
it must be brought in. The first points
are interchangeable in some cases, it
being better to extract trumps first in
others to establish the suit first" Here
Is found an absolutely sound long-suit
principle that might have been enun-
ciated by Bum, Tormey, E. lie Roy
Smith, or ever Cavendish himself.
Howell, in his whist Openings"
says: play the long-suit game if you
have a good plain suit, fair strength in
trumps, and at least one probable card
OF re-entry in another suit" Some
may say that this is not sufficient to
prove Mr.. Howell's title to being class
ed as a long-suit player, but, whatever
he may say to the contrary, he is one.
as he never fails to attempt to bring
in his long suit whenever he has the
chance of doing SO. In the tourney
taht was played by correspondence sew
eral years ago, Mr.. Howell made the
following opening: Clubs, A., O., j., 10.
8, s, Z; hearts, A, O., 8, 7; spades, 4
3. Jack of hearts turned. Howell open
ed with the ace of clubs, and followed
with the jack. A real snort-suit OPEN
ing would AVE been the spade; but
Howell played for his long suit, ex-
pecting to make it. Another hand was
opened by him in the same tourney, as
follows: Spades. A, X, O.. j., 4; hearts,
j., 2; clubs, 5, 4, 2; diamonds, 10, 8, g;
trump, 6 of hearts. Howell opened the
hand with the ace of spades. 1t Is at
times absurd to designate as a short
suit player a player of skill because he
will at times for different reasons omen
his long suit. If the short-suit game
were really all that its adherents claim
for 1t, 1t would be proper to never omen
anything but the very worst thing that
the hand contains. The shorter the
better. That the game has won dis
repute at various congresses is not so
much the fault Of the highest form of
so-caQed short-suit whist that is play
ed, but rather because the men who
indulge in it are many of them honest
neither with themselves nor with those
with whom they meet. Compare the
writings of any of them with the way
players express themselves in regard 20
the game and a wide divergence will be
found. In talking with a short-suiter
one gets the impression that never un-
der any circumstances do they try to
establish or bring in a long suit. That
1T Is always more profitable to open
short, So that many Of their gains
have been made by the enemy taking a
strong lead for a weak one. If the
game is to be judged in any way, it
must be by the book-writings of its
leaders, and there one finds, as proven
above, that the same methods for es-
tablishing and bringing in the long suit
prevail here as in the orthodox game,
only a little differently handled.
instead, then, OF speaking Of a con-
test as II in which the long suit won
and the short suit was defeated, or vice
versa, would it not be fairer and in a
truer spirit of sport to give credit 10
individual ability or to team work? 1t
Is not going too far to make the state
ment that every player of skill in the
country is really a long-suit player. The
differences that eyiSt arc in raoard ~