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 ofhighcards. For example, it may contain two or morehonours—one honour in each suit being the average for each hand. 2. It may consist of more than the averagenumberof 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 isestablished—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 thatthis fortunate personmaybe 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, orlong 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 atenace(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 ismore 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 farthey 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 (seePlay 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 firsttwo 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. (SeeAppendix 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 aheadsequence or anundersequence. 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 undersequences; thus ace, queen, knave, ten, is an example of an under sequence of queen, knave, ten. You should—