WHIST.

Press, Volume LIII, Issue 9604, 19 December 1896, Page 3

WHIST.

"Weekly Press and Referee." SCORING AT WHIST. Unsatisfactory as is the present English method of scoring, it has probably been adhered to so long because there is no general consensus of opinion as to what would be the best system to adopt in its place. The Americans have substituted a simple game of "seven up" for the singles, doubles, trebles and rubbers of former days, and maybe that will be the one which will eventually become universal, but there is another method which has been suggested and which is found to meet with great approbation wherever it has been tried, and that is to make the game to consist of four, or a multiple of four, hands. The advantage of this lies in its being especially suitable to club play where men come in for only a short time as a rule, and like to play a few hands before dinner. The time taken for four hands is on the average fifteen minutes, and so any player coming into a whist room can know for certain that within that time he will be able to " cut in " and then get his eight hands—for he will be entitled to two games —M'ithout any chance of the cards running " contrary," and so spoiling all the game. It is a matter within nearly everybody's experience that sometimes one rubber will last from thrse-qnartcrs of an hour to an hour, and then any unlucky person who has to await its finish has to stand, a bored spectator, while the game "drags its slow length along," possibly through twentyseven deals ; in the meanwhile he is unable to start a game of piquet or anything like that, as one big hand may finish "the rubber. It is possible, moreover, that when he does get his turn the rubber" may be finished in two hands, in each of which, perhaps, only half-a-dozen tricks are played and the rest of the cards thrown down by reason of all the honours being on one side. Everybody has seen a " bumper " lost and won in five minutes. Now, the scoring " seven up " though it reduces does not abolish the objection. In thatsystem one 'game may last through thirteen hands and the next only one hand, and it therefore is just as unsuitable for the play at club 3. Now with the method we recommend it is obvious that these drawbacks do not apply, and there is another advantage to which we would draw attention, and that is that it gives a far larger margin of points. In the rubber there can only be a difference of six points (we do not count the rubber' points, as that is only a bet on the result, and may be added"to any game), in the American there can be only seven, but in this method there can be twenty-eight, and persons who play for points have, therefore, the opportunity of losing or winning far more than under the old style. It is possible also that the game may result in a tie, and that has been urged as an objection, but we cannot think that it is so. Cricket, football, golf, and almost every . game, except billiards, can and occasionally does result in a tie, and nobody ever dreams of urging that as a drawback to those games. Why, then, should it be so to whist ? There is one point, however, which requires to be considered, and that is, what should be done in the case of a misdeal ? The principal supporter of the system suggests that in that case the deal should pass, and the game consist of only three hands, and, as it is necessary to impose a penalty for a misdeal, this appears to be about the best way of arranging the matter, for as the deal is an advantage it would be useless to insist on the fourth hand being played out, as that would giye the original dealer a second deal and so counteract the penalty. However, this is a very minor .point, and each club could easily-arrange such a detail in the way they may think best.