There was this example cited by an expert (Frank Stewart}. On the hand ♠ 943 ♡A52 ♢AQJ ♣ 8732.the SE consensus was that “11” high card points were really more like seven because of the 4-3-3-3 shape, lack of honors in the four card suit (clubs), weakness in the major suits, and unfavorable vulnerability (vulnerable versus not). Under the circumstances, the indicated bid over an opposing bid of one spade and partner’s (takeout) double was two clubs, not three clubs.

The same Frank Stewart also recommending downgrading the following hand to “seven” and holding back to one heart instead of two when partner had doubled a one club opening call with the following:

♠ T63 ♡KQT4 ♢QT82 ♣ K2.

Here the main problem is that the king of clubs is not pulling its full weight in front of the opening (club) bidder. But the shape is a better 4-4-3-2, the four card suits have honors, and about half the length and strength is in the majors, (And the bidder was not vulnerable.)

Are there “numerous” instances in which 10-11 high card points should be treat as “seven.” More specifically in this case, does one defect warrant such a downgrading? Or was it multiple issues with the first hand that would bring about this treatment?