AUCTION BRIDGE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18959, 3 January 1930, Page 6

AUCTION BRIDGE.

SUIT DISTRIBUTION.

A. E. MANNING FOSTER.)

It is a sound rule of bidding that ■when your partner makes an initial bid in a major suit, you should not take him out when you hold normal, or more than normal, support in his bid, unless you can see certain game, or almost certain game, in another declaration. But, like almost all general rules, there are exceptions. The fact that an initial suit bid is now made often on four only, introduces a new element. A further consideration is that with certain suit pat:erns or distributions, experience shows that it may be advisable to take out the major suit bid into a No Trumper. For example, at love score, Z deals and bids ‘‘One Spade”; and A says, ‘‘No bid.” Y, holding S, Q J 4; 11, A 9 63; D, K 7 2; C, A Q 5, has more than a sufficiency for support in Spades. He can either pass the Spade bid, call ‘‘Two Spades,” or bid ‘‘One No Trump.” Conservative opinion would favour leaving the Spade bid, which may be a game winner. So why disturb the bid? But Y’s suit pattern favour No Trumps more than a suit. A hand divided 4, 3,3, 3 plays better as a rule at No Trumps than in a suit. This is a fact which is now becoming increasingly recognised by those who study suit distribution. It is true that Y’s Spades fill in the suit and probably make it solid, but they will do this for No Trump tricks as much as for Spade tricks. And though the outside high cards are tricks, for a Spade contract, they are equally tricks at No Trumps. Then there is the clinching argument that three at No Trumps will give game, whereas four are required in Spades. It will be found, only too often, that a hand such as Y holds will produce three tricks at either denomination in combination with Z’s holding, with the result that the game is won if Y bids “No Trumps,” and just missed if he leaves it at Spades. The following is an instance from actual play when Y had the cards as shown above, and passed “One Spade” by Z:— Y'

A led the Jack of Clubs, Y's Queen winning. The trumps were then cleared, and Z made five trump tricks, one Heart, one Diamond, and two Clubs, but not game. The same number of tricks would have been won by Y at “No Trumps.” The opening by B of the conventional lead of 5 of Diamonds would only leave a Club finesse later to make the nine tricks for game. There is a class of hand with which the switch to No Trumps should certainly not be made. But I am convinced that the take out is advisable, even when holding a sufficiency in the suit bid, if (a) Y’s suits are divided 4-3-3-3 or 4-4-3-2, and (b) the other three suits (or at least two of them) are well protected. Many games will thereby be won which would otherwise be missed. But if the suits are unequally divided the take out may be emphatically undesirable. Suppose Y has precisely the same high card strength but the

suits run S, Q J x; H, A x x x; D. K Q x x x; C, A. The novice think the hand is of the same va...e and all the suits are stopped, so if a No Trump take out is good in the one case, it is equally good in the other. But this is not so. In the first case Y’s Spade had only one value, namely, that of filling in Z's Spades and making them probably solid. Whereas in the second hand those Spades have an additional value—for ruffing losing Clubs, and thereby making one or more extra tricks in themselves. This being so, it is advisable to keep them as trumps. Also Y’s shortness in Clubs increases the probability that Clubs will be opened bv the adversaries. This will be a disadvantage at No Trumps, but an advantage at Spades. In the one case the suit is more likely to be cleared at an early stage for the benefit of the enemy, while with Spades as trumps the earlv clearance will only facilitate ruffs by Z. Here is shown the advantage of making No Trumps on a well-balanced hand and of a suit on a hand with singletons or bare suits. It is not only that short suits can be ruffed at a trump contract. It is also, and still more, that the short suits are the most likely to be opened and cleared by the adversaries. Suppose that Z’s original bid of One Spade was made, as it was in actual play, on S, A K 9 7 3; H, 10 5; D. 9 6 3; C, 8 7 3, if Y’s hand is the second, namely, S, Q J 4; 11, A 9 63; D, K Q 8 7 2; C, A, there is a distinct probability that Clubs will be led originally whether the contract is No Trumps or Spades. And, if only for this reason, Y must support Z’s Spades and avoid a No Trump.