[sceptic]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     Pass  2♣    Pass
 2♦    Pass  2NT   Pass
 4NT   Pass  6NT   Pass
 Pass  Pass  

I looked at this and thought squeeze, but on the way I lost the plot a bit, despite reading bens notes, I made the contract but I did not feel comfortable with how I went about it, I kept thinking after each play to change my mind, what is the correct way to play this?

you can find the hand at www.bridgebase.com/myhands

[Chamaco]

You need one of the black suit to break, so

I would choose between:

a ) rectify the count and play for a double squeeze (both opps guard H)
This involves giving up chances of a strip squeeze and endplay in diamonds, since the trick you should concede early is in diamond, so no long diamond trick will be cashed.

b ) play for a strip squeeze by reducing both opps to 3 Hearts and throwing them in with the 3rd H to have them lead diamonds.
The problem with this approach is that the opp holding the DQ may unblock under A or K of H.


All in all I'd choose a) since it keeps option open for various squeeze types AND for diamonds 3-3, provided at least one of the black suit breaks.

[Free]

start with small ♦ to the 9. If South has the T, you already have your 12 tricks. In either case, you keep control of all suits and you get the possibility of a double squeeze as Chamaco pointed out. Then it's time to test your suits. If either suit (except ♥) splits 3-3 you make your contract. If none of them splits 3-3, then you should have a double squeeze. The question is what opps lead and what they continue after you give away your ♦ trick, since the high ♥s can be quite important in what suits to test first.

[Fluffy]

♦A, then low ♦ to the ♦J to rectify the count.

Later play the minor honnors discovering ♦ is your 11th trick.

Now you need to try a ♠-any squeeze, ♠A+♠Q, ♦9 and nobody is squeezed because ♠ are 3-3.

[inquiry]

I am not surprised that you lost your way here. This is a much more complicated "squeeze" position than any that I have presented to you so far in the beginner discussion group. But it is good you looked at this hand and thought, can there be a squeeze here? That is the first step to finding them. With practice it becomes easier and easier.

So, to follow the method, as with any squeeze, let's examine this hand from the BLUE perspective. Only one opponent will have as many as 4♣ and only one opponent can have as many as 4♠. So the fourth spade and fouth club can be threats. In addition, only one opponent can have as many as four diamonds, so there is another possible threat (not to mention the threat of the diamond jack). What are the losers? With 3♠+3♣+2♥+2♦ we have 10 tricks, thus Losers = 3. From our SQUEEZE perspective, you have two too many losers. We haven't covered what to do when loser count is defective. To get to a simple squeeze, you need to find TWO WINNERS and correct the count. We could duck a diamond here one way or the other (I would go ♦AK and low if I were to do this), playing for 3♦ trick. This would 1) gain a diamond trick (get us to 3♦, and 2) correct) and while losing us a trick, will correct our remaining loser count to 1. Now you make if either black suit splits 3-3, or if not, either opponent has four cards in both black suits. The squeeze ending would be something like this...

In this hand, East had 4-4 in black suits, and diamonds were good for three tricks.

Here, North plays the diamond 9 (13th) and east is squeezed in clubs and spades. Note that EW hands could be reversed, same result

---

With a third diamond, after cashing cllub AKQ.. you know if that suit splits or not. Then enter dummy (with heart or spade) and cash good diamond. Threats club x, foruth spade...so that if spades are 3-3 you make. If spades are not, if the hand with fourth spade has last club, the squeeze above works. I think this is the line the people ducking a diamond are trying. One cashed Diamond ace then low diamond. Another the low diamond immediately, hookiing the nine. The correct way to play this suit for a lot of reasons is CASH-AK. This is the best chance to win three tricks in this suit, and is the best chance to win four trick in diamonds as well (if EAST had Qx). So reduce points for "solving" if your line includes ducking a diamond without cashing both top honors.

Now, let's look at the squeeze analysis by Chamaco... there is a bad one and a great one there.

Quote

You need one of the black suit to break, so

I would choose between:

a ) rectify the count and play for a double squeeze (both opps guard H)
This involves giving up chances of a strip squeeze and endplay in diamonds, since the trick you should concede early is in diamond, so no long diamond trick will be cashed.

We haven't studied double squeezes yet, but if we had, you will see that "a" can not be correct, because there is a FATAL FLAW in that logic. The flaw is that in a "double squeeze", the double threat (hearts in this case) has to have an entry in the hand with the threat. If you swaped the ♥A and the ♥8, the double squeeze would be a more attactive option.

He then espoused a very attractive line he labelled b..

Quote

b ) play for a strip squeeze by reducing both opps to 3 Hearts and throwing them in with the 3rd H to have them lead diamonds.
The problem with this approach is that the opp holding the DQ may unblock under A or K of H.

Item number b, is a wonderful one showing an understanding of advanced squeeze endings. The problem you have for b is that loser count is 3. The strip squeeze works when loser = 2. So, you need to find one or the other of black suits split 3-3. The ending you play for is something like the folloiwing (where you cashed AKQ of clubs, found WEST with a fourth one), then cashed one top diamond, then played three round of spades ending in your hand (spades where 3-3). This is position as you lead your last spade.

In this hand, East had 4-4 in black suits, and diamonds were good for three tricks.

Here, North plays the diamond 9 (13th) and east is squeezed in clubs and spades. Note that EW hands could be reversed, same result

---

This requires that the hand long in black suit, also have three or more diamonds to the Queen, and can't trick you (or doesn't trick you), by coming down to doubleton diamond queen. You can prevent this a little bit by cashing one diamond first (good in case stiff diamond Queen or Ten, or doubleton diamond QT anyway). I like this option, and think this is a reasonable approach.

I guess I like both the strip squeeze and the cash diamond AK and continue diamonds. But for beginners, since we haven't covered when to look for or try to identify strip squeezes, the play would be win heart opening lead, and then play three round of diamonds.

Ben

[EricK]

I am terrible at working out odds (especially at the table) but the simple line of playing 3 rounds of diamonds seems the best to me. If the diamonds lie very well (doubleton Queen offside, singleton Q or QT doubleton onside) you make the slam without any help from the black suits, and unless they lie very badly (4-2 or 5-1 break with QT lying over the J) you keep the chances of both black suits breaking or there being a squeeze.

If the opponents are inveterate count signallers you might try leading the king of both black suits early to see if the opponents are kind enough to tell you exactly what to play for, but even so I think AK5♦ is right.

Eric

[Fluffy]

Ben, and probably Erick as well are better than me at percentages, but are you really sure that giving a chance of going auto-down while ♣ and ♠ can be both divided is the best way to handle this deal?.

That simple chance is just frightening me.

[EricK]

Fluffy, on Nov 25 2004, 09:09 PM, said:

Ben, and probably Erick as well are better than me at percentages, but are you really sure that giving a chance of going auto-down while ♣ and ♠ can be both divided is the best way to handle this deal?.

That simple chance is just frightening me.

It is never nice to go down early in the hand! Although it does have the advantage of conserving mental energy for subsequent hands

But the alternative play of ducking a ♦ early risks losing an unnecessary diamond trick, and doesn't even guarantee the contract. Doesn't the chance of losing a trick to a doubleton Q also frighten you?!

The strip squeeze (and I admit I probably wouldn't even have noticed it at the table unless I was really concentrating) seems to require a more unlikely distribution of cards than the one you are worried about (QTxx(x) offside) - if one black suit breaks 3-3 and the other doesn't, then the Q is likely to be with hand which is shorter, but as Ben's analysis shows, you really need it to be with the longer hand. Also, in the diagram, if West boldly discards his low ♦ you still have to read the position to make it (a situation common to almost all strip squeezes!).

Eric

[Chamaco]

I thought that ducking an early diamond -while not guarateeing the contract) wins in many more cases than cashing AK of diamonds.

It wins even when diamonds break badly and

1) there is a simple squeeze or double squeeze or
2) when the black suits break

Instead, playing off AK and a diamond, it wins when - assuming the bad 4-2 break-neither T nor Q drops.

The chances of the doubleton hand to hold none of the T or the Q is 5/9 of all the 4-2 bad break distributions, so not bad.


By playing the alternate line of low diamond to the 9, we:
- win in the case when QTxx is onside; (2 chances out of 9)
- keep the hand open in case of QTxx offside; (2 chances out of 9)
- it makes no difference if diamonds split 3-3
- lose a chance when one hand has doubleton Qx or Tx (5 chances out of 9)


However, cashing top honors, even if singularly it gives more chances, means to put all eggs in one basket, e.g. we cannot combine chances.

I will not go into the calculations, but I have the feeling that the additional chances of black suit splitting and squeezes on 2/3 suits souyld make it more rewarding to start with low D to the 9 ?

[EricK]

Chamaco, on Nov 26 2004, 08:37 AM, said:

I thought that ducking an early diamond -while not guarateeing the contract) wins in many more cases than cashing AK of diamonds.

It wins even when diamonds break badly and

1) there is a simple squeeze or double squeeze or
2) when the black suits break

Instead, playing off AK and a diamond, it wins when - assuming the bad 4-2 break-neither T nor Q drops.

The chances of the doubleton hand to hold none of the T or the Q is 5/9 of all the 4-2 bad break distributions, so not bad.


By playing the alternate line of low diamond to the 9, we:
- win in the case when QTxx is onside; (2 chances out of 9)
- keep the hand open in case of QTxx offside; (2 chances out of 9)
- it makes no difference if diamonds split 3-3
- lose a chance when one hand has doubleton Qx or Tx (5 chances out of 9)


However, cashing top honors, even if singularly it gives more chances, means to put all eggs in one basket, e.g. we cannot combine chances.

I will not go into the calculations, but I have the feeling that the additional chances of black suit splitting and squeezes on 2/3 suits souyld make it more rewarding to start with low D to the 9 ?

How does ducking early gain if diamonds are 4-2 with QT onside?

Eric

[Chamaco]

EricK, on Nov 26 2004, 08:54 AM, said:

How does ducking early gain if diamonds are 4-2 with QT onside?
Eric

I wrote badly, what I meant is that wins the contract, but in the comparison with cashing AK it is in fact equivalent.

Basically the 2 differences are that by playing low to the 9:

- we win when QTxx offside = 2/9 of all the 4-2 distributions = 2/9* about 48% = about 10.66 %
- we lose when there is doubleton Qx or Tx = 5/9 of all the 4-2 distributions = about 26.66 %

BUT playing off AK loses the opportunity to combine chances if it goes bad: they will cash the final 2 tricks right away, so that changes the problem.

Now the problem is whether by combining other chances we can fill the 16% gap.
I think so, because then we can play for the additional combinations of 33 breaks and various squeezes.

[Fluffy]

actually finding ♦Q doubleton offside is less probable than finding Q10xx, but that means nothing since you have to combine these chances with chances of making when they happen.

[Chamaco]

Fluffy, on Nov 26 2004, 03:16 PM, said:

actually finding ♦Q doubleton offside is less probable than finding Q10xx, but that means nothing since you have to combine these chances with chances of making when they happen.

The favourable chance of playing AK is not only of finding Qx but also of finding Tx.
(in both cases an honor is pinned by AK and either J or 9 will be promoted- this will make the play no worse than low to 9 at first round, if the Ten is doubleton, and definitely better when the Qx is doubleton and RHO holds the Txxx)
So the analysis has to include the presence of the T in the doubleton.

The single chance of finding Qx is 1/3 of all the 4-2 spits (and the single chance of finding Tx is the same).

The combined chances of NOT finding ANY of these 2 keycards in the doubleton (which is equivalent to QTxx in the long hand) is 4/9 of all the possible 4-2 split, so the chance of finding at least Q OR T is 5/9 of all the possible 4-2 splits.

These have of course to be combined with the extra options.

[inquiry]

Playing the ♦AK is the precentage play, and the right play to attack diamonds here. First, playing AK makes the slam outright 10.9% of this time. This is QT doubleton with either player (a combined total of 3.23%, or any Qx doubleton behind the dummy (6.46% chance), and then there is a 1.2% chance of a singleton queen behind dummy.

Playing diamond first risk not gaining an extra trick with doubleton Ten offside (id you guess nine), or doubleton queen offside (if you guess nine), or with singelton queen in EAST if you guess wrong, or singleton Queen wiith East if you guees wrong.

All in all AK and a diamond wins 4 tricks the 10.9% of the time, and wins 3 tricks and additional 74.6% of the time (3 tricks a 85.5). Thait is, AK and a diamond loses two diamond tricks only to EAST having QTxx (9.7%), QTxxx (4.8%) or QTxxxx (0.7%). Of course, if EAST shows out on first or second round of diamonds, you will not play a third.

The chance of both blacks suits being 3-3 is not so good (13.2%), biut if you duck a diamond and set up a third diamond, all you need is one black suit to split (or the squeeze). Still the odds are good that way, let's say 67.7% you gain an extra trick in diamonds with low diamoond (50% queen on side, + 17..7 diamonds 3-3 with queen offside). But that is remarkably lower than the odds of starting AK, and you of course give up all chance (nearly 11%) of wiinning 4 diamond tricks.

Ben