opposing three-quarter over the side-line. Excessive aggression is a
mistake. A young Civil Servant of my acquaintance even went so far as to
abstain from claiming an obvious revoke when the delinquent was the chief
of his department. Unfortunately, however, this young man, so wise in other
ways, had the annoying habit of turning his chair to bring him luck. On one
evening, when the run of the cards was against him, he turned his chair
between every hand and so annoyed his chief that no promotion has ever come
his way, and he now spends his days bitterly regretting that he did not
claim that revoke.

Passing to another point, I am asked by a correspondent if it is
permissible occasionally to play from left to right, instead of from right
to left, just to relieve the monotony. He asks, not unreasonably, why, if
this is not so, writers on Bridge go to the trouble of putting those little
curved arrows to show which way round the cards are to be played.

For myself, I see no reason why the right-to-left convention should not
occasionally be reversed, always provided that the whole table agrees
beforehand to play in the same direction.

There are many other points to which I should like to refer, and many
players to whom I should like to give a word of warning. There is the
player who suddenly breaks off to join in the conversation of other people
who happen to be in the room. There is the player who whistles to himself
while he is playing: this is a grave fault, nor does the class of music
whistled affect the question; the _Preislied_ performed through the teeth
is quite as exasperating as _K-K-Katie_. Then there is the player who
breathes so hard with the exertion of the game that he blows the cards
about the table. Finally there is the player who slaps the face of his or
her partner. This is a mistake, however great the provocation. I have not