Chapter 18

03-22-2006 20:01:25

Chapter 18 Evaluating When Partner Has a Short Suit

We learn partner is short in a specific suit in several ways.

Through a splinter or mini-splinter.
Through a long-suit (help suit) game try. The implication in a long-suit try is shortness in one of the unbid suits.
The opponent's bidding and our length in their suit strongly suggests partner is short in their suit. Be careful. I have seen them overcall with four and raise with two.
Through an auction where partner bids three real suits. (I can think of only a couple in our system.)

There are times when we know partner is short in one of two possible suits. These ideas can be used in "what if" evaluations for each of the suits.

Chapter 2 gave shorts known rules for revaluing when partner has a singleton or void in a suit. To repeat:

Count honors in that suit ace = 3, king = 1, queen and jack = 0.
Add 2 points with three or more cards in the suit ..
Subtact 1 point with a singleton or void.
If your value plus partner's minimum is 25, then bid a major-suit game.

More simply, a queen and at least three cards is normal duplication. With less than three cards, you do not get the bonus of two points, and you degrade a singleton or void by one point.

I test these rules for revaluing opposite a singleton or void. The rules are not perfect. I attribute this to

Queens and jacks in live side suits are overvalued.
Kings in dead side suits are overvalued.

A hand that you would accept an invitational raise is:

A K 8 3 2
K 8
K J 9
7 6 4

1 Invite
?

The senorita and Gib analyzed this hand using (at least) 1008 responder hands for all experiments. The results depend on the number of trumps held by responder, with more trumps being worse. The difference between three and four trumps is significant to a statistician. Five trumps should be significant to all. Responder hands with five or more trumps were not used except to demonstrate this point.

Deals That Make Game
Responder
Number of Side suits Game%
3-4 Any length 50% All 3 or 4 trump limit raises.

3 No shorts 55% Three is better than four is better than five.
4 No shorts 51%
5 + No shorts 40%

3-4 Short 80% Increased count by 2.
3-4 Short 23% Decreased count by 1.
3-4 Short 29% Decreased count by 2.

Deals That Make Game
Responder
Number of	Side suits	Game%
3-4	Any length	50%	All 3 or 4 trump limit raises.

3	No shorts	55%	Three is better than four is better than five.
4	No shorts	51%
5 +	No shorts	40%

3-4	Short	80%	Increased count by 2.
3-4	Short	23%	Decreased count by 1.
3-4	Short	29%	Decreased count by 2.

The results support the assertions.

A K 6 5 3
8 2
K Q 8
9 4 3

Short clubs. Point gain is two. 46% games. You would normally pass, and you still should at matchpoints. Accept at IMPs!

A K 7 6 3
K 9
Q 4 3
K 7 2

Would you prefer a singleton club or a singleton diamond? The fractional numbers of Appendix 1, suggest a singleton diamond, and that is supported by the results. Would you prefer K-x-x or K-x opposite partner's singleton?

K-x opposite singleton. 17 points reduces to 15 points. 40% games.
Q-x-x opposite singleton. Same count. 70% games.
K-x-x opposite singleton. Same count. 53% games.

Partner mini-splinters in hearts on the next two hands. My reaction is: I don't care what the count rules are, or what Gib says to do. I am going to bid 4 . If you stop at three at matchpoints on either of deals and four makes, that is a zero.

A K 6 3 2
A K 8 7
7 2
3 2

Partner announces short hearts. A solid 17 points reduces to 16 points. 46% games. Senorita-Gib say do not bid game. I looked at some of these deals. The lack of honor cards in clubs and diamonds is punishing, and there are communication problems between the two hands.

A K Q 7 2
K Q J 6
J 8
9 7

Short hearts. Started with 18 at spades. The J-x is zero high cards. Reduced to 15 points. 43% games. The rules are right.

Home Contents Chapter 17 Chapter 19 BACK