[jtfanclub]

So THAT'S what they mean when they say bid like the experts!

[ArtK78]

Everyone knows what a Moysian fit is - a 4-3 fit.

I had never heard of a Burns fit, but I may have coined the phrase "Sub-Moysian" fit - typically a 3-3 fit.

Sometimes the 3-3 fit plays quite well. But I wouldn't want to make a habit of it.

A regular partner of mine, after one of our not too infrequent forays in a 3-2 fit with a combined high card total of about 12, said the reason he went down was that there were too many trumps and points offside.

[FrancesHinden]

ArtK78, on Apr 23 2008, 04:04 PM, said:

I had never heard of a Burns fit, but I may have coined the phrase "Sub-Moysian" fit - typically a 3-3 fit.

A 'sub-Moysian' is known to me as a 4-2 fit, which is more often playable than a 3-3!

[Apollo81]

jdonn, on Apr 22 2008, 03:41 AM, said:

A minimum hand with shortness in spades is a huge danger sign against balancing when the opponents are in a minor.

A lof of the time in this situation, if you bid the next thing you know you'll be defending 4♠ making.

[Apollo81]

FrancesHinden, on Apr 23 2008, 11:12 AM, said:

ArtK78, on Apr 23 2008, 04:04 PM, said:

I had never heard of a Burns fit, but I may have coined the phrase "Sub-Moysian" fit - typically a 3-3 fit.

A 'sub-Moysian' is known to me as a 4-2 fit, which is more often playable than a 3-3!

Also known to me as a 4-2, I thought this was an old term

[pclayton]

Apollo81, on Apr 23 2008, 07:18 AM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Apr 23 2008, 11:12 AM, said:

ArtK78, on Apr 23 2008, 04:04 PM, said:

I had never heard of a Burns fit, but I may have coined the phrase "Sub-Moysian" fit - typically a 3-3 fit.

A 'sub-Moysian' is known to me as a 4-2 fit, which is more often playable than a 3-3!

Also known to me as a 4-2, I thought this was an old term

It is, so is a mini-Moysian which is a 3-3.

[jdonn]

I always liked penultimoysian but it never caught on

[skjaeran]

This is an auto-pass for me.

Burn's law say that you should't play with a trump where the opponents have more trumps than your side.

Over here we jokingly refer to a 3-2 fit as an Ulfsian fit, after Ulf Nilson and partner relayed to 6♣ on such a fit in the Nordic Championship 10 years ago.

[kenrexford]

I played in a 7-board match in Chattanooga a few years ago against a very strong team (names you would know). At about board 2, I ended up declaring the final contract of 4♥ with a 5-0 fit (not a 5-0 split, a 5-0 fit), down, instead of either minor slam or 6NT, making, vulnerable.

At about board 6, our opponents declared a final contract of 4♥ with a 4-1 fit. When dummy hit and Declarer made an appropriately rude comment, I countered that at least his partner had a stiff for him.

I doubt that two presumably competent teams have ever before or after had each side declare a trump suit with only five trumps in a single seven-board match, let alone the exact same contract.

One could call this a Cotterman-Katz Fit.

[han]

I think Chattanooga fit is a better name.