Name this squeeze
Henry Lockwood
myself - it was the first one I've successfully spotted in advance,
played for and executed.
The hands:
A6
A5
A52
KQ7654
J42 K853
T942 J8
873 KQ964
832 J9
QT97
KQ763
JT
AT
On the lead of a small diamond, you win in dummy, then cash three top
hearts discarding a diamond (this has the obvious advantage that it's
going to be trivial if hearts are 3-3). You then cash clubs, coming
down to:
A6
-
5
5 (played)
J42 K8
T -
- KQ
- -
QT9
7
-
-
If E pitches a D, he is endplayed into leading away from his SK. If
he pitches a spade, the K drops and the Q scores. This is not a
positional squeeze (as it works whatever you discard from S); it needs
you to guess the S position correctly (but there's only one line so
you take it, and it works here). Is it some sort of strip squeeze?
Henry
Will in New Haven
That's what I think it's called. Very nice.
--
Will in New Haven
David Babcock
It became one when West discarded a diamond. If he keeps his diamonds
and East pitches the KQ9, West can win the attempted throw-in trick.
David
vincit
In French it is called : Squeeze d'affaiblissement et remise en main
(Yes I think "strip squeeze" is right, not sure ...)
I do not know what you call it in English
I know it will not help (LOL)
BTW when RHO play S you still have to decide as you saidso why would
you put the Q instead of the 10 50/50?
Look in Geza Ottlik, Adventures in Card Play, you may find it, in this
case let us know the English name
vincit
Will in New Haven
abondoning Diamonds to be fatal to East? In the end position there's a
spare Spade in the South hand as well as a Heart he doesn't need.in
_this_ layout, although it might be a thread against West in another.
Alan Malloy
Yes, Love calls it a vulnerable-stopper strip squeeze. Incidentally
there are two lines, not one. When East leads a spade you can play for
him to have underled his jack rather than his king, and stick in the
ten. So you might well go wrong even on this layout.
--
Cheers,
Alan (San Jose, California, USA)
metobillc
First off, congratulations! Nice strip squeeze.
I'm curious though, how did you decide that you would play for that
squeeze, rather than a heart-diamond, heart-spade, or triple squeeze
against RHO? I think at the table I would have ducked the opening
lead, and then tried for one of those, coming down to the QS and KQ7
of hearts in hand, and the A5 of diamonds and a small heart in dummy.
If RHO has the KS and the heart length, he's squeezed on the last
club; the same thing happens if he has the only diamond guard and the
heart length.
Bill Campbell
vsp...@hotmail.com
> A6
> -
> 5
> 5 (played)
> J42 K
> T -
> - KQ9
> - -
> QT9
> 7
> -
> -
>
If RHO is thinking ahead his four card end
position should be SK DKQ9. Then on the
C5 RHO can pitch the DQ.
David B
This type of squeeze is known interchangeably as a "squeeze without
the count", "count squeeze" or "strip squeeze"
David W.
patri...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yes, every time I manage a squeeze or strip squeeze, I'm always in 3NT
or 4M and going to great lengths to make an 11th trick. Usually in
team games. :) I think the only double squeeze I've ever (knowingly)
executed won me a grand total of 1 IMP.
I think I would also have tried to squeeze RHO in the majors as above.
This wins when hearts are 3-3 (36%) plus when hearts are 2-4 plus RHO
has KS (10-12% or so--seems better than playing RHO for lots of
diamonds and KS).
Of course, you didn't give the bidding, and I suppose it's possible
that North dealt and opened 1C, and East stuck in a 1D overcall. In
that case the strip squeeze looks like a better idea (especially since
you won't misguess the spade position at the end), although I agree
that really good EW discarding might ruin it for you if East doesn't
have six diamonds.
--Patrick.
David B
I've been trying to construct a (at least semi-)natural bidding
sequence that leads to six (or any other number of) no trump played by
South.
With W or N as dealer, N needs to not rebid (or open) in NT, but then
after a supposed 3C rebid, did S just jump to 6NT with JT of diamonds?
And if S instead rebid 3S, wouldn't N now bid NT? Further, if E
overcalls in diamonds, why would S ever bid NT? Maybe e was silent, N
reversed into diamonds, S rebid 2NT giving up on spades, N jumped to
4NT, and the blackwood express didn't stop until it got to slamton.
Of note is W's lead of a small diamond which suggests E bid (or
doubled) diamonds at some point.
With E or S as dealer, S would open 1H, or possibly 2D (flannery);
over the latter, N would bid likely 2NT (is 3C forcing in Flannery?
maybe 2D-3C-3N-6N?) to ask for further info so that can't be it.
After 1H, N might have responded 3C and S might have jumped to 6NT.
Feasible I guess, but still - jt tight(!) of diamonds.
I'm guessing (based on the line of play) that E somehow showed
diamonds. Maybe the OP will enlighten us.
As to the play: If E indeed overvalled diamonds then the strip squeeze
is a good line since (for those that suggested a major suit squeeze
against E) that line also works when E has the sK and four hearts
(i.e. switch two of W's hearts for 2 of E's spades): S wins the dA
and runs all the clubs coming down to:
Ax
Ax
xx
x
imm Kx
Jxxx
K
Qx
KQxx
T
E has already been squeezed out of a diamond winner. But the last
club crushes him.
David W.
Richard Pavlicek
Several notes:
1. It's called either a "strip squeeze" or a "squeeze throw-in".
2. You must keep DJ in hand, else East could defeat you by
keeping SK8 DK6 as last four cards (West keeping D8).
3. You should cash CA first to preserve throw-in chances in the
event of a stiff CJ.
4. If lead were indeed a "small diamond" a better play is to run
clubs first, reverting to a heart throw-in if hearts don't break
(i.e., SK with heart stopper), as diamond honors rate to be split.
On the D8 lead (implying DKQ East) it's more or less a toss-up, but
I'd still run clubs first, preferring to find West with SK and a
heart stopper rather than more points East (plus the possibility
of diamond honors still being split).
5. Yes, I'd go down.
--
Richard Pavlicek
Web site: http://www.rpbridge.net
Will in New Haven
I don't think a small diamond means the honors rate to split. Not
against 6NT. I think it is much more likely to be a bottom of nothing
lead from a suit where most people would lead top of nothing.
--
Will in New Haven
>
Henry Lockwood
> I managed a squeeze in 6NT online today, and I'm rather pleased with
> myself - it was the first one I've successfully spotted in advance,
> played for and executed.
>
> The hands:
>
> A6
> A5
> A52
> KQ7654
> J42 K853
> T942 J8
> 873 KQ964
> 832 J9
> QT97
> KQ763
> JT
> AT
A couple of comments:
The lead was in fact the D8; I forgot which it was when I wrote
"small".
The auction was not a thing of beauty. S dealt:
1H - 2C
2NT - 6NT
Cashing H AKQ makes it fairly obvious that E can't be squeezed in the
majors :)
HenryL
patri...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yes, but cashing the top hearts also makes it impossible to squeeze
East or West in the majors no matter how the cards lie, as you have no
entries to your hand after playing the clubs. Playing two rounds of
hearts commits you to the strip squeeze if hearts don't split.
One last comment: a couple people said that after your throw-in you
still have to guess whether East has been endplayed into leading away
from the Jack or from the King of spades. This makes zero sense to me:
if East had the Jack but not the King, why wouldn't he keep two
diamond winners and pitch down to a singleton JS? This beats the
contract 100% of the time (West keeps Kx of spades and his good
heart).
--Patrick.
David Stevenson
>This type of squeeze is known interchangeably as a "squeeze without
>the count", "count squeeze" or "strip squeeze"
No, it isn't. A "squeeze without the count" is something completely
different: it is a normal squeeze without the strip element which
because of a strange event [more than one type is possible] still works
without having to duck down ot the correct count. Love's CLE squeeze
[should be called CLEM in my view] is an example. But it is not a strip
squeeze.
As for a count squeeze, I do not know what that is.+
--
David Stevenson Bridge RTFLB Cats Railways
Liverpool, England, UK Fax: +44 870 055 7697 ICQ: 20039682
<webj...@googlemail.com> bluejak on OKB
Bridgepage: http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm
Richard Pavlicek
> David B wrote
>>This type of squeeze is known interchangeably as a "squeeze without
>>the count", "count squeeze" or "strip squeeze"
>
> No, it isn't. A "squeeze without the count" is something completely different: it is a normal squeeze without the strip
> element which because of a strange event [more than one type is possible] still works without having to duck down ot the
> correct count. Love's CLE squeeze [should be called CLEM in my view] is an example. But it is not a strip squeeze.
>
> As for a count squeeze, I do not know what that is.+
From my understanding (or lack of same), "strip squeeze" is
a general term, referring to any squeeze in which a trick is
lost after the squeeze.
"Squeeze without the count" is a kind of strip squeeze, also
called "delayed-duck squeeze" (according to Love's work using
the CLE mnemonic). CLEM? Hmm... I remember Red Skelton as
Clem Kadiddlehopper. Does that count?
"Count squeeze" is the same as "show-up squeeze" or "show-up
finesse" except the missing honor is offside. For example,
if declarer knows LHO has the HA, he can't go wrong:
AQ
K
-
-
xx K
A xx
- -
- -
xx
-
-
A
agum...@gmail.com
> David Stevenson wrote:
> > David B wrote
> >>This type of squeeze is known interchangeably as a "squeeze without
> >>the count", "count squeeze" or "strip squeeze"
>
> > No, it isn't. A "squeeze without the count" is something completely different: it is a normal squeeze without the strip
> > element which because of a strange event [more than one type is possible] still works without having to duck down ot the
> > correct count. Love's CLE squeeze [should be called CLEM in my view] is an example. But it is not a strip squeeze.
>
> > As for a count squeeze, I do not know what that is.+
>
> From my understanding (or lack of same), "strip squeeze" is
> a general term, referring to any squeeze in which a trick is
> lost after the squeeze.
My memory of Love is that a strip-squeeze always involves a throw-in
after the squeeze and comes in two flavors:
1. Squeeze the victim out of a winner before the throw-in, then put
him in to gain a trick when he leads away from a vulnerable stopper
2. Squeeze the victim out of an exit card then throw him in to lead
from a vulnerable stopper.
> "Squeeze without the count" is a kind of strip squeeze, also
> called "delayed-duck squeeze" (according to Love's work using
> the CLE mnemonic). CLEM? Hmm... I remember Red Skelton as
> Clem Kadiddlehopper. Does that count?
I don't think a delayed-duck squeeze is a strip squeeze (according to
Love). In a delayed duck squeeze, there is no element of throw-in. The
squeeze removes a dangerous card, such as a side winner, after which a
trick is ducked in a threat suit to establish a trick. E.g.,
AJx
x
x
--
KQ
KQ
A
--
xx
AJ
--
A
Assume the hand is played in NT. If South ducks a spade at this point,
West can cash the DA. But if South cashes the CA first, South is
squeezed in three suits. South must pitch the DA to avoid losing a
trick immediately. But now it is safe to duck a spade to West,
establishing an additional spade trick.
Andrew
Richard Pavlicek
> My memory of Love is that a strip-squeeze always involves a throw-in
> after the squeeze and comes in two flavors:
>
> 1. Squeeze the victim out of a winner before the throw-in, then put
> him in to gain a trick when he leads away from a vulnerable stopper
>
> 2. Squeeze the victim out of an exit card then throw him in to lead
> from a vulnerable stopper.
>
> I don't think a delayed-duck squeeze is a strip squeeze (according to
> Love). In a delayed duck squeeze, there is no element of throw-in. The
> squeeze removes a dangerous card, such as a side winner, after which a
> trick is ducked in a threat suit to establish a trick. E.g.,
>
> AJx
> x
> x
> --
> KQ
> KQ
> A
> --
> xx
> AJ
> --
> A
>
> Assume the hand is played in NT. If South ducks a spade at this point,
> West can cash the DA. But if South cashes the CA first, South is
> squeezed in three suits. South must pitch the DA to avoid losing a
> trick immediately. But now it is safe to duck a spade to West,
> establishing an additional spade trick.
Your example would be classified as a "three-suit strip squeeze" as
opposed to the more common two-suit variety:
ATx
xx
--
--
KQJ
KQ
--
--
xx
AJ
--
A
Both are "delayed duck squeezes".
I just checked my motheaten Love book, and he does group all
squeezes that lose a trick after the squeeze as strip squeezes,
though he differentiates "two-suit" vs. "three-suit" varieties.
His three main two-suit varieties are "vulnerable stopper",
"delayed-duck", and "losing squeeze card".
Speaking of "vulnerable stopper", I ditched that term 35 years
ago when a student argued, "But we weren't vulnerable!"
agum...@gmail.com
Thanks for checking. Wish I could find my copy!
> Speaking of "vulnerable stopper", I ditched that term 35 years
> ago when a student argued, "But we weren't vulnerable!"
:-)
Ian Payn
<agum...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bddd89c5-3c6a-481b...@p2g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
My memory of Love
++++Is a great title for a song.
is that a strip-squeeze always involves a throw-in
++++Is not such a great second line.
David Stevenson
>David Stevenson wrote:
>
>> David B wrote
>>>This type of squeeze is known interchangeably as a "squeeze without
>>>the count", "count squeeze" or "strip squeeze"
>>
>> No, it isn't. A "squeeze without the count" is something
>>completely different: it is a normal squeeze without the strip
>> element which because of a strange event [more than one type is
>>possible] still works without having to duck down ot the
>> correct count. Love's CLE squeeze [should be called CLEM in my view]
>>is an example. But it is not a strip squeeze.
>>
>> As for a count squeeze, I do not know what that is.+
>
>From my understanding (or lack of same), "strip squeeze" is
>a general term, referring to any squeeze in which a trick is
>lost after the squeeze.
I am sorry, I do not agree. A strip squeeze is one of a group of
squeezes where there is a throw-in element [or threat of one]. A
squeeze without the count does not qualify.
>"Squeeze without the count" is a kind of strip squeeze, also
>called "delayed-duck squeeze" (according to Love's work using
>the CLE mnemonic). CLEM? Hmm... I remember Red Skelton as
>Clem Kadiddlehopper. Does that count?
Love gave as the requirements Companion, Lead, Entry, and then added
"of course" you need the master in the other suit - so CLEM alwaays
seemed more logical.
>"Count squeeze" is the same as "show-up squeeze" or "show-up
>finesse" except the missing honor is offside. For example,
>if declarer knows LHO has the HA, he can't go wrong:
>
> AQ
> K
> -
> -
> xx K
> A xx
> - -
> - -
> xx
> -
> -
> A
>
>
Right, gottit.
Will in New Haven
> <agump...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Post of the Year Nominee
Richard Pavlicek
> ... A strip squeeze is one of a group of squeezes where there is a throw-in element [or threat of one]. A squeeze without the
> count does not qualify.
All strip squeezes involve a "throw-in", but you seem to define
it as "forcing an opponent to lead into a tenace" rather than its
inherent meaning of "putting an opponent on lead". Or is this
another British/American quirk?
In a "squeeze without the count" (aka "delayed-duck") an opponent
is thrown in (by the obvious definition), so it's a kind of strip
squeeze. Likewise for a "losing squeeze card".
David Stevenson
>David Stevenson wrote:
>
>> ... A strip squeeze is one of a group of squeezes where there is a
>>throw-in element [or threat of one]. A squeeze without the
>> count does not qualify.
>
>All strip squeezes involve a "throw-in", but you seem to define
>it as "forcing an opponent to lead into a tenace" rather than its
>inherent meaning of "putting an opponent on lead". Or is this
>another British/American quirk?
Not all names are logical, for example and over call is a bid and an
overbid is a call. But I have never heard anyone [including my American
friends] use the term throw-in to mean the same as duck.
>In a "squeeze without the count" (aka "delayed-duck") an opponent
>is thrown in (by the obvious definition), so it's a kind of strip
>squeeze. Likewise for a "losing squeeze card".
As I say, not according to my understanding of the definition. Also,
your definition is unhelpful, because now you have taken a name away
from a group of plays, but have not given them a name.
agum...@gmail.com
> <agump...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:bddd89c5-3c6a-481b...@p2g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> My memory of Love
>
> ++++Is a great title for a song.
Who wants to hear a song that lasts only 5-seconds?
Andrew
Richard Pavlicek
> Not all names are logical, for example an overcall is a bid
> and an overbid is a call. But I have never heard anyone
> [including my American friends] use the term throw-in to
> mean the same as duck.
>
> ... Also, your definition [of "throw-in] is unhelpful, because
> now you have taken a name away from a group of plays, but have
> not given them a name.
As I see it, the term "throw-in" is a casual substitute for
"tenace throw-in" much as anyone might say "phantom" to mean
"phantom sacrifice". Using the shortcut, however, does not
appropriate its meaning. For instance, in a "stepping-stone
squeeze" an opponent is thrown in to provide an entry to a
stranded winner; however, by your definition this is not a
"throw-in"; and to call it a "duck" sounds silly. Does it
even "walk like a duck?" :)
After a squeeze, an opponent can be thrown in to:
1. Lead into a tenace
2. Establish a suit (delayed duck)
3. Provide an entry to opposite hand (stepping-stone)
4. Squeeze his partner (losing squeeze card)
5. Claim the rest (Florida endplay) :)
To say only #1 is a "throw-in" makes no sense. But then,
neither do I sometimes.
Will in New Haven
My friend Harold modestly calls the last one the "Feldheim endplay."
Since it is one of the only instances I can remember of his being
modest, I think his name for it should be considered.
Richard Pavlicek
> My friend Harold modestly calls [a throw-in play where an
> opponent claims the rest} the "Feldheim endplay." Since it
> is one of the only instances I can remember of his being
> modest, I think his name for it should be considered.
LOL, I had other names for it too but chose to be discreet.
Harold's a great guy... and one tough opponent.
> Will in New Haven
Won't in Fort Lauderdale
-RP
Derek Broughton
You cynic! It's 22 years, 3 months and counting - and we still play bridge
together.
--
derek