Matchpoints and Major Suit Fits

If you dig back a ways in duplicate bridge, particularly during the days when 4 card majors were opened, from the outset the hand was bid in a manner to end up in no trump almost by default. While you still see 4-4 major suit fits being played in no trump contracts, modern bridge correctly teaches that these hands should most often be played in the major suit fit for the simple reason that they usually make an additional trick in the suit contract. The major reasons for this preference are:

1. The trump suit acts like a stopper if the opponents have a long suit to run or establish before declarer gets his ducks in order.

2. With the 4-4 fit, if either of the partners has a short suit, it can be ruffed in the other hand, and yet, most often, control of the trump suit is maintained.

3. If either hand contains a singleton, it is almost always preferable to play the 4-4 fit in the major suit.

If you are thinking of rejecting the major suit in favor of no trump, consider the following criteria.

1. Hand Strength. The 4-4 fit is almost always superior if the hand has 25-26 hcps, or to put it another way, to consider no trump on the hand, it should have extra values like 29-30 hcps. These extra values are insurance against the opponents running a suit. In the later case, most often both contracts will make 11 tricks.

2. Holding in Short Suits. The absence of middle honors (queens and jacks) in your short suits is a favorable factor in playing the suit contract. When your short suit is made up of Qx, opposite KJx, then the suit produces a natural trick and the value of the ruff goes away. Same thing with Jx opposite QT9.

3. Holding in 4 Card Side Suits. This issue is much like 2. above, but with a different face. If your 4 card side suit contains Queens and Jacks, the ruffing value is frequently wasted because you often end up ruffing out 3rd and 4th round natural winners. If your side suits are headed by Aces and Kings and otherwise have empty values, the shortness in the other hand will be useful in ruffing out losers in the suit.

4. Trump Holding. I know it seems like the 4-4 fit always faces a 4-1 split in the suit, but it only happens about a third of the time. But that is often enough. If the 4-4 trump suit contains good intermediate honors like KTxx opposite QJxx, the 4-1 split by itself will not create a loser. Conversely, if the suit is Axxx opposite Kxxx, the 4-1 split will always cost you an additional loser in the trump suit. Thus, if you reject the 4-4 major contract in favor of the no trump contract, it is best to do so when you suit has weak intermediate honors.

These criteria come from bridge expert Kit Woolsey in his book Matchpoints (1982). He says that unless you have 3 of the 4 criteria, play the 4-4 fit in the major suit, but it is better to have all 4 present. If you don’t want to draw subtle distinctions, stay with what your teacher told you! Play the 4-4 fit in the major.

The 5-3 fits in majors have the same considerations, but in that layout the shortness, if it is to have trick saving value, has to be in the hand with the short trump. Not as convincing a case, but still probably right. It also makes the case for playing the 4-4 fit as trump even if you have a 5-3 fit in the other major. The rule is pretty well known, but the reason often escapes even better players.

If the supporting hand is 4342 (three trump), with the doubleton it is almost always better playing the 5-3 fit than no trump. I fought that rule for a long time arguing that the possibility of doubleton vs. doubleton evened things out, but I am grudgingly giving up that position. In these cases, the hand with the 3 card support is probably in the best position to set the final contract. Even if the hand is 4333, no trump will only be the superior contract if the combined hands have all suits stopped and contain extra values.

Now don’t come to me with your tales of how two novices got all the matchpoints playing a hand with an 8 card major suit fit in no trump. More often than not, it is a case of the experts defending giving the hand less than an expert defense.