[000ffj]

---

It's from actual combat.Declarer will make this 3nt if he cashes 4 cards club after a♥,and east was squeezed on 4th♣.
So It's better to cash free winners first for declarer if it doesn't damage connection,and miracles occur naturally.
Another further problem is"Can you beat this contract in double dummy?"

[ahydra]

It's hands like this that are stopping me from becoming an expert, to be honest. Without any clues from the bidding as to East's shape, I would never envisage him being squeezed in three suits, even though this is just an ordinary layout.

Then again, I'd be interested to hear if East threw two diamonds on the run of clubs, would the experts play a diamond to the ace?

ahydra

[Vampyr]

ahydra, on 2013-October-07, 06:47, said:

It's hands like this that are stopping me from becoming an expert, to be honest. Without any clues from the bidding as to East's shape, I would never envisage him being squeezed in three suits, even though this is just an ordinary layout.

It is often a good idea simply to run your longest suit and see if something good happens.

[000ffj]

ahydra, on 2013-October-07, 06:47, said:

It's hands like this that are stopping me from becoming an expert, to be honest. Without any clues from the bidding as to East's shape, I would never envisage him being squeezed in three suits, even though this is just an ordinary layout.

Then again, I'd be interested to hear if East threw two diamonds on the run of clubs, would the experts play a diamond to the ace?

ahydra

I‘m still a really novice so far,but I just want to stop wonderful boards from my side slip away.More hope to get the guidance of masters, facilitate me improve faster.

[lamford]

ahydra, on 2013-October-07, 06:47, said:

Then again, I'd be interested to hear if East threw two diamonds on the run of clubs, would the experts play a diamond to the ace?

No, they wouldn't, as the diamond finesse would be a better chance than having executed a triple squeeze without the count.

[dake50]

"No, they wouldn't, as the diamond finesse would be a better chance than having executed a triple squeeze without the count." -- lamford
*** So another glimpse into an expert thought: East wouldn't give up spades to set this contract
even to unguarding his DK (knowing declarer won't settle for 3Nt-1 his 8 tricks: 4xC +HAKQ +DA).

*** I would try the triple w/o the count just to have a good story IF that works.

[ahydra]

dake50, on 2013-October-09, 04:02, said:

"No, they wouldn't, as the diamond finesse would be a better chance than having executed a triple squeeze without the count." -- lamford
*** So another glimpse into an expert thought: East wouldn't give up spades to set this contract
even to unguarding his DK (knowing declarer won't settle for 3Nt-1 his 8 tricks: 4xC +HAKQ +DA).

Yes, I think it would be an excellent defence to throw two diamonds on the run of clubs. Unlike the triple squeeze, that defence is just about one I might find at the table - for some reason I can visualise layouts better on defence than as declarer, probably due to clues from the bidding.

Spoiler

You start with the HT, declarer wins HA (or partner discourages). Now you place declarer with four or five diamonds on the auction, so you can't beat it using diamonds. Hence the only layout that works is if partner has the SA (and maybe the Q), declarer not having a spade stop - but you then need to keep all your spades, and need to stop dummy's fourth heart becoming good, leaving you no choice but to throw two diamonds and hope declarer finesses, which he almost certainly will as Lamford said.

The only question is - you only have time to tank on the 3rd round of clubs, would that be too late and give declarer a tell?

ahydra

[nige1]

000ffj, on 2013-October-07, 06:32, said:

....Another problem is
"Can you beat this contract in double dummy?"

---

Even at double-dummy, you can't defeat the contract. If you replace declarer's ♦J with a small ♦, however, then LHO can lead a ♦ to defeat it. To avoid losing the first 5 tricks, declarer must rise with ♦A. Now RHO can discard ♠s on declarer's ♣s

[000ffj]

nige1, on 2013-October-09, 11:31, said:

Even at double-dummy, you can't defeat the contract. If you replace declarer's ♦J with a small ♦, however, then LHO can lead a ♦ to defeat it. To avoid losing the first 5 tricks, declarer must rise with ♦A. Now RHO can discard ♠s on declarer's ♣s

No,you can't defeat the contract still like you assuming that 9♦ and J♦ exchanged.
The best defence is lead spade from east and west overtook with q♠,shift diamond,then declarer can rise with A♦,and east will be squeezed after you cash the last club,east must discard 2 cards spade,and then declarer plays a spade,east will be endplayed on 4th heart if west doesn't overtakes with A♠,and declarer will establishes t♠ if west overtakes spade with A♠，so at last defender will just win 2 tricks in spade and 2 tricks in diamond or 2 tricks in spade k♦ and 4th heart.

[nige1]

000ffj, on 2013-October-10, 01:59, said:

No,you can't defeat the contract still like you assuming that 9♦ and J♦ exchanged. The best defence is lead spade from east and west overtook with q♠,shift diamond,then declarer can rise with A♦,and east will be squeezed after you cash the last club,east must discard 2 cards spade,and then declarer plays a spade,east will be endplayed on 4th heart if west doesn't overtakes with A♠,and declarer will establishes t♠ if west overtakes spade with A♠，so at last defender will just win 2 tricks in spade and 2 tricks in diamond or 2 tricks in spade k♦ and 4th heart.

You are right 000ff and it's an interesting problem. Thank you My analysis was right assuming South to be declarer -- but the auction in your diagram shows North bidding no-trumps first