David,

There's no second query in this case. As I mentioned in my other post, the execution plan for such query in most cases would be the same as with your suggestion.

>
>Yes, you would. But it's a better alternative to running a second select to get what you want.
>
>>This is what I had for a while but had to turn it with name reference because of problems it causes at the class definition and its expansion. For example, I have a property cField, for those lists you see here. If I switch two fields or change its order, I would have to think about change the ORDER BY 3 to another number for example. If I have ORDER BY FirstName, I wouldn't have to worry about it.