Deschapelles coup
type of lead in game of bridge
In bridge, the Deschapelles coup is the lead of an unsupported honor to create an entry in partner's hand; often confused with the Merrimac coup, the lead of an unsupported honor to kill an entry in an opponent's hand.
This sacrificial play was invented by Alexandre Deschapelles, a 19th-century French chess and whist player.
Example
Geir Helgemo executed this Deschapelles Coup in a 1998 tournament.
Helgemo was East against South's 4♦. West led a small spade, Helgemo put up the ♠Q and South won the ♠A. South then returned a spade to Helgamo's ♠K. Helgemo cashed the ♣A and switched to the ♥K (the coup). Dummy won the ♥A and played the ♦Q to the ♦K, ♦A and ♦J.
Now declarer tried to enter dummy with the ♣K, but Helgemo ruffed, put West in with the ♥Q, and ruffed the club return for down two.
It would not have helped South to duck the ♥K because Helgemo would simply have continued hearts, winding up with a trick in each suit.
And it would not have helped Helgemo to switch to a low heart at trick four. South wins West's ♥Q with the ♥A, leads the ♦Q, covered and won, and then leads another heart to endplay Helgemo.
This is a particularly unusual Deschapelles coup, because it is combined with a Merrimac coup.
“Deschapelles coup” enters the record as type of lead in game of bridge. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Deschapelles, coup and type can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Deschapelles coup” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Deschapelles, coup and type provides the most credible route into that argument.
The strongest evidence will usually combine a dated visual record with documents produced by the authority responsible for the place. The source revision retrieved here is dated Oct 10, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q2998942. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1998.
Modern boundaries and familiar names can conceal earlier jurisdictions or structures that do not align with the present site. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.
- Historic place names
- Jurisdictional context
- Routes into maps and plans
Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Deschapelles coup”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Deschapelles coup primary sources, Deschapelles coup archive and Deschapelles research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Deschapelles coup”?
- Which authority defined the place, boundary or structure at the relevant date?
- Which earlier names or jurisdictions may reveal additional records?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Deschapelles coup” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.