It is the mutual plan of players by leading a losing card to put it into the adversary's hand to oblige him to lead that suit, whereby you preserve the tenace. So far is easily comprehended; but it requires attention, with practice, to apply the principle, so obvious in the superior, to the inferior cards, or see that the same tenace operates occasionally with the seven and five, as the ace and queen, and is productive of the same advantage.. A, last player, re mains with the ace and queen of a suit not played, the las trump and a losing card. B, his left-hand adversary, leads a forcing card. Query-How is A to play? Answer. It three tricks win the game, or any particular point, he is not to ruff, but to throw away his losing card, because, his 'eft-hand adversary being then obliged to lead to his suit, he remains tenace, and must make his ace and queen. But upon the supposition that making the four tricks gains him the rubber, he should then take the force, as in these situations you are justified in giving up the tenace for an equal chance of making any material point.

The finesse has a near affinity to the tenace, except that the latter is equally the object where two, and the former only where there are four players. A has the ace and queen of a suit led by his partner. Now the dullest beginner will see it proper to put on the queen; and this is called finessing it, and the intention is obviously to prevent the king from making, if in the hand of his right-hand adversary. Should it not be there, it is evident you neither gain nor lose by making the finesse; but few players carry this idea down to the inferior cards, or see that a trick might be made, by a judicious finesse, against an eight, as a king;-but to know exactly when this should be done requires more skill than in the more obvious cases, united with memory and observation. Another case of finesse, even against two cards, frequently occurs, and the reason, on reflection, is self-evident.

A leads the ten of a suit of which his partner has the ace, knave, and a small one; B should finesse or let the ten pass, even though he knows the king or queen is in his left-hand adversary's hand; because he preserves the tenace and probably makes two tricks; whereas, had he put on his ace, he could make but one;-in short, tenace is the game of position; and finesse, the art of placing yourself in the most advantageous one.

The trumps all out, A remained with the ace, queen, knave, and two others of a suit not yet played, and the lead. The adversaries had five tricks and the odd trick decided the rubber; consequently he must win four out of the remaining five cards to save it. I need not observe, that the ace is the card usually led from such a suit; but A considered that by so doing it was highly improbable he should establish the suit, and that his sole hope was to deceive the adversary. He led the queen, which was won by the king; and as his partner had not the ace, the adversary naturally concluded it to be in his partner's hand, and of course that by returning this suit he must win the game. The consequence was that A won the four tricks and the rubber.

OBSERVATIONS ON SHORT WHIST.

A NEW game has lately come into fashion, which is de noted SHORT WHIST. This, though apparently played on the same principles, is in many respects essentially different from the Long Game: so much so, that it ap pears obvious to me, a very critical player at the one may be deficient at the other. There have been, I presume, two inducements for this alteration; the one to promote a quicker circulation of the cash, and make the play deeper; the other to reduce the advantage of the good over the baa player, by approximating a game of skill still nearer to a game of chance. That it has both these effects is evident, for Short Whist is much higher play at a guinea, than Long Whist at two guinea points; and I am convinced that the fewer points to be played for, the greater the ad vantage to the inferior player: on the supposition that the honors, on an average, are four in the Long, and two each game in Short Whist, I think the good player has double the advantage in the former to what he has in the latter game, having twice the number of points to play for. very good player at one game would undoubtedly, by reflection and practice, become so at the other; both are games of attack and defence, and a great deal depends on properly judging which is to be adopted; but no rules can

A

give what depends on natural quickness and observation. In general, however, I think the forward game is oftener right in the New than in the Old Whist. To force your partner, and endeavor to steal a trick, would be thought often allowable in the Short, when in the Long Game it would be condemned.

The odds are also very considerably altered, and cæteris paribus, I conceive it is at least five to four in favor of the dealer for the game, and six to five for the rubber in the New; whereas in the Old Game it is at most gold to silver, or 21 to 20. To conceive this, you must consider that it is little more than two to one against the turning up an honor; and having turned one up, it is nearly an even bet that the dealer scores two by honors. For, as two out of the other three must be in the hands of one party, and the dealer and his partner having twenty-five cards, there is only twenty-six to twenty-five against their having them.

This is so decided an advantage, where five is the num ber to be played for, that I am confident two bad players, with the first deal in every game, would in a long run beat the two best in England.

In Short, as in Long Whist, though the knowledge and practice of general rules may constitute a tolerable player; get, to acquire any excellence, a critical perception when and how these are to be departed from is absolutely neBessary. There are few things to be observed in which there is a considerable difference in the two games; though three, in the first instance, is nearly as good as four (I mean your adversaries not having scored a point), still it is by no means so if they are also three or four. The reason is obvious; it is the chance of calling which gives eight the advantage over nine; but this not being allowed at three, it is evident that if your adversary is at four, and you have two by honors, three is not better than two, as without the odd trick you lose the gaine. Of course, in the begin ning of a game, no finesse is justifiable on which depends your scoring two or four, when you have three certain in your cards.

It is easy to conceive, that with a very good hand it is not improbable that you may score five; though highly so, that you do not ten. Of course bold play is much oftener Buccessful in the Short than the Long Game, and stealing a

trick, which will save the game in the one, will, in case of a great hand, seldom have that effect in the other

In contradiction, however, to my opinions, I hear that the good players are fonder of the New than the Old Game; though I can see no argument in favor of this, except (as I before premised) that it circulates the money quicker.

I cannot omit one observation: Though, with good players, the lead nearly counterbalances the advantages of the deal with bad ones, it is of little or no advantage; of course, it increases that of the dealer. The first lead in both games requires judgment, and is so little comprehended that it is generally twelve to one a wrong card is played, and the fate of the whole hand frequently depends upon it. These are, however, such plain situations that it is impossible to make a mistake.

At Short Whist, the first deal, there is scarcely any finesse that is not justifiable, when the failure leaves you at three instead of four.

DUMBY, OR THREE-HANDED WHIST.

THIS game is played exactly in the same manner as fourhanded Whist, with the exception that one of the hands, that called Dumby, lies exposed and spread on the table throughout the game, and is played by the partner to whom it is allotted, in conjunction with his own.

Three persons draw from the pack in the usual manner, and he who draws the lowest card takes Dumby as his partner, and the deal, with the choice of cards and seat.

When the rubber is over, it becomes the turn of the party who had cut the next lowest card to take Dumby, with all its privileges, choosing another seat or keeping his own.

When the second rubber is finished, the third player takes the Dumby, and this is called having a round at Dumby.

In distributing the cards, the hand of Dumby is dealt as usual, and then the partner arranges them as he pleases, with the faces upwards. Dumby has his deal in turn.

The advantage which the partner of Dumby is supposed

to derive from playing a hand which he can see, and therefore adapt to his own, is generally supposed to be about one point in ten in the long game, and five to four in the short, in the rubber; and sometimes a point is given by Dumby's partner on each rubber.

66

Deschapelles says: Among players of moderate preten. sions, the defender has a trifle the best of it; among good players, it is equal; and among first-rate players, the assailants have the best by a trifle."

The same authority says, that "in playing this game, decisive strokes are in favor of the defence (i. e. Dumby) in the first rounds, after which the advantage gradually leans to the assailants." He therefore recommends that the deferder should act with energy in the commencement, having little or nothing to hope when the play assumes its regular course. On the other side, it behooves the assailants to watch with patience till they see clearly the best course open for their adoption.

It will be self-evident to a Whist-player, that the adversary who sits on the left of Dumby should always lead or play up to what he sees to be the weak suits, and that he who sits on the right should lead or play through the strong ones.

The laws and regulations are, with two or three exceptions, and these not quite agreed, the same as those of the parent game. The principle of three-handed Whist, as regards the acts and liabilities of Dumby, is a spirit of mutual responsibility, and this should influence the game in all its bearings. Duimby may fairly be exempted from fines which arise from errors committed in sight of, and therefore it may be said with the acquiescence of, both parties. A new deal, in most cases, is as much as the adversaries should have a right to claim against Dumby.

If Dumby's partner lead out of turn, the adversaries may either insist upon the card led, or call a suit from either Land. By special exception, Dumby cannot make a revoke; the oversight may be remedied by a new deal.

As regards the other players, more particularly as respects acts not dependent on Dumby, there seems no reason why they should be allowed any exemptions.