Conventions

Home

M J Bridge

Bidding

Hands

Theory

The four-four trump fit


One of the advantages of playing a system which features four-card majors is the ease it provides in locating a four-four trump fit.

Now is the time to explain the advantage of such a fit, as it is a factor which will affect our bidding, and indeed our system agreements, in a number of situations.


First of all a little elementary arithmetic should be brought into play.


In any given suit, including the one which you are about to choose as trumps, there are thirteen cards.

As a general rule you wish to hold longer trumps in one of your two hands than do either of your opponents.  If you hold a strong side-suit you will sometimes survive with a suit of equal length to your opponents’ longer holding by forcing that opponent to ruff and thus shorten his trumps, and very occasionally this technique will work when an opponent holds longer trumps - eg the dreaded five-nil split when you will probably have to force him to ruff in at least twice - but for the purposes of the present argument I will assume that we require trump control.


One way of doing this is with length in one hand.  Even a five-one fit will frequently control the suit as your opponents’ seven cards split four-three more often than not (62% of the time), but it is not comfortable and it is not the sort of fit which you will actively search for. Six-nil is even more likely to guarantee trump control, and for this reason alone those players who always run for safety when holding a void in partner’s suit will frequently not have made the correct choice.


More often, though, our trumps will be split more evenly between the two hands.


With a combined seven-card holding


the possible splits are seven-nil, six-one, five-two, and four-three.

Seven-nil and six-one should not present too many difficulties.  Frequently these will be the result of a preemptive bid on which you never really expected to find more than two cards in the suit in your partner’s hand.

Five-two will be the best fit on occasion.  It is not something which you aim for, but provided that you do not require extra tricks by ruffing in dummy it tends to play quite well.  Your opponents six cards will split four-two or three-three as much as eighty four per cent of the time.


Four-three is of sufficient interest to have earned itself a name - the ‘Moysian’ fit.

Just occasionally such a fit is the best available.  Clearly there will be a weak suit, otherwise a no trump contract would have been preferable.  Frequently there will be a side-suit shortage in the hand with the three-card holding.

There have been whole books written about the play of these hands.  Ruffs in the short-suited hand will be common-place, and even the dummy reversal, taking two or three ruffs in the long hand will not be uncommon.  It will also frequently be necessary to take out two rounds of trumps at the most, leaving at least one trump in each hand to maintain control whilst establishing tricks in one or more side-suits.


But, having said that, most of you will, like me, be looking for


an eight-card fit or better


This leaves your opponents with only five trumps, which will divide three-two  68% of the time, and four-one a further 28% of the time.

That leaves only 4% for a five-nil split.

As above, a partnership holding which is divided eight-nil, seven-one, or six-two is not going to give you any difficulties in terms of trump control.  Your only difficulty will be the lack of ruffing opportunities in the short hand.

The important debate is whether a four-four holding or a five-three holding is preferable.

Clearly a five-three holding gives you greater control when your opponents’ cards break badly, but I hope to convince you that if you might need to manufacture an extra trick then four-four is in fact far superior.


Consider these two hands:-


With either spades or hearts agreed, West has a five-loser hand and East has a ten-loser hand.  This would suggest four losers between the two hands, and they are there to be seen.  On a superficial appraisal of the situation you will lose one spade, two diamonds and a club.


Given that the split of your opponents’ cards is no worse than four-one in each major suit you can see four spade tricks, four heart tricks and a club to make nine tricks in all,  and if you are playing the contract in spades that is exactly what you will make.

It is true that two of your minor suit losers will disappear on your long spades, but by the time that this has happened you will have no trumps left, which will leave you with a fourth loser in the minor suits after you have taken your nine tricks.


But what if you are playing the contract in hearts?

You will still be in trouble if your opponents find a club lead.  When they get in with A they will have the opportunity to cash their other minor suit tricks.

But on any other lead the situation is totally different.  Whenever hearts split three-two you will be able to clear trumps and establish your spade suit for a club and a diamond discard, eventually ruffing a diamond in the West hand for an extra trick.

Quite simply, spades have made four tricks, just as they did when they were trumps, but hearts have now made five tricks.


Timing will be critical if the hearts fail to split three-two, but the principle is unaltered.

You might ask why this has made a difference - after all you ruffed two minor-suit tricks in the West hand when you played in spades - but these were in the long trump holding.  They were always going to make two tricks anyway.  When you play in the four-four fit you can choose which hand to take your ruff in.  Obviously it will be the hand with a short suit.

And which hand is that shortage going to be in?  More likely than not it will be in the same hand that holds length elsewhere - spades in the example above.  That is where the extra trick comes from.


The example given was manufactured for the purposes of illustrating this point but the principle is sound.  There will be a significant number of occasions on which the four-four trump fit will produce one more trick than the five-three fit.

If you know that you have enough tricks and you are presented with this choice then by all means choose the five-three fit to cover against bad breaks, but perhaps you should have been looking for higher things in your bidding - and you will probably prefer a five-three fit in trying for a four-level contract in a major to a four-four fit as you strive for eleven tricks in a minor - but if you have a choice between a five-three fit and a four-four fit in both major suits, or for that matter in both minor suits, then in the long run it will pay to choose the four-four option.


Surprisingly perhaps, the principle is still true if your choice lies between a four-four and a five-four fit.


W

K Q J 5 3

A K Q 4

6 3

9 5


E

T 7 4

J T 7 3

T 8 4 2

A 6


W

K Q J 5 3

A K Q 4

6 3

9 5


E

T 7 6 4

J T 7 3

T 8 2

A 6


I have moved only one card in the East hand to produce a stronger spade fit, but the analysis above is virtually unchanged.

There is still a maximum of nine tricks if played in spades, but there are chances of an additional trick in the West hand if hearts are trumps.  Surprising perhaps, but none-the-less true.


Finally, on this theme, let me just point out a very different situation in which the four-four fit is greatly to be preferred with this rather extreme example:-


W

K Q 5 3

9 7 2

A K Q J 7 5


E

A J 6 4

K Q 5 4

8 6 2

9 6


If you play these hands in the delightful diamond fit you will make twelve tricks whenever North holds the A.

The other fifty per cent of the time you will make exactly eleven tricks as you lose two hearts along the way.

But now try playing these hands in that four-four spade fit.

You will still lose the A, only now you can count six diamonds, four spades, one heart, and a club ruff in the West hand.  Note that ruffing with a diamond in the West hand would not have produced an extra trick but ruffing with a spade does.  Almost a lay-down twelve tricks, and what an excellent slam to be in.


The principle expounded on this page is important and should affect the way in which we use certain bids.


I shall look at some of the possibilities at various points within this site.