kfgauss Posted December 17, 2003 Report Share Posted December 17, 2003 I've been reading through Clyde Love's Bridge Squeezes Complete and came across this hand (Exercise 36), in which one was "supposed to" take standard inferences from a lead against 6NT. QT5AK8564A654 A4Q76AKQJ7K82 W N E S P 1DP 1H P 2NP 6N P PP West leads the 3 of clubs to East's Q and you duck. East continues with the club T and you win with the K (West plays the 7) and play two rounds of diamonds, all following. Now if clubs or hearts are 3-3 you're home. If not, there are various squeeze chances. So, two questions (let's assume your opponents are decent players, whatever that means): 1) Who is more likely to have 4 clubs... i.e. are they 73 QJT9 or are they J973 QT? The lead from J973 seems pretty unattractive against 6NT (but leading from a small doubleton in an unbid suit also seems so). 2) How do you play? My analysis of the play (may well be wrong or not best under the assumptions made): If you assume West's got the 4 clubs (and so started with J973), the contract is cold: run the 3 hearts, then the rest of the diamonds, either squeezing West in hearts or clubs or executing a double squeeze if East's got the hearts (your spade 4 is the spade threat). (This is the "solution" to the problem.) If you assume East's got the 4 clubs, there's a double squeeze if West's got the heart guard. Here you need to cash your last club winner before your last diamond (and let's say that if you cash 2 more diamonds, tossing spades from dummy, that the defenders both toss spades, so that doesn't help). Note also that the second line still allows you to succeed when West has 4 clubs if the heart-club squeeze is on against West (as you realize that West's got the clubs in time). Andy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted December 17, 2003 Report Share Posted December 17, 2003 Clyde's book, which is a classic, was written at a time when 2nd best lead (ie 3 from 73) did not occur. So to put this problem in the context of the time it was written, WEST would have either 3 clubs, or four. Second, the standard play with the EAST cards from QJT9 by EAST would be the 9 at trick on one, followed by the queen at trick two, not Queen then Ten. The point to a bridge problem like this is was to give the reader the normal kind of problem and allow him to "test drive" his squeeze play. Could the defenders, playing standard signals, both get inspired on the same hand, so that WEST false cards in clubs and leads the three from 73 and EAST likewise falsecard in the same suit and play the Queen then ten? It can happen of course, but that would be very hot defense indeed. You are correct that if Hearts and clubs are split, regardless of who has the hearts and who has the clubs, there is a double squeeze with the spade 4 as the threat. But if you play for this and west has both of those suits you are down (if EAST has both hearts and clubs, of course, no squeeze for lack of U). You didn't mention, but if WEST has SPADE King, and 4-4 in hearts and clubs, he is triple squeezed to gain one trick, but that is just too darn easy. Now, there are several errors in clyde's book (it might be fun to pull out some of them for discussion), but this doesn't seem to be one. The correct play at the table seems to be to infer that if anyone can stop clubs it is WEST, and pay the opponents whose lead low from 73 and who falsecarded from QJT9. Now if east had played the nine at trick one and then the queen or JACK at trick two, you alternative line would be much more attractive, especially if they mark 2/4 opening leads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfgauss Posted December 17, 2003 Author Report Share Posted December 17, 2003 Clyde's book, which is a classic, was written at a time when 2nd best lead (ie 3 from 73) did not occur. So to put this problem in the context of the time it was written, WEST would have either 3 clubs, or four. Second, the standard play with the EAST cards from QJT9 by EAST would be the 9 at trick on one, followed by the queen at trick two, not Queen then Ten. The point to a bridge problem like this is was to give the reader the normal kind of problem and allow him to "test drive" his squeeze play. Could the defenders, playing standard signals, both get inspired on the same hand, so that WEST false cards in clubs and leads the three from 73 and EAST likewise falsecard in the same suit and play the Queen then ten? It can happen of course, but that would be very hot defense indeed. I didn't in any way mean to malign Clyde's book, which I'm quite fond of, and I quite understand that one is supposed to take normal inferences from the defense in the book in order to give context for the squeezes. (For example, I was quite ready when two hands later the lead was 4th from QTxx at 6NT.) That said, this seemed an interesting problem when set nowadays against good opponents. How often do good opponents lead from J973 (or from QT43) against 6NT these days? Perhaps the answer is "much more often than low from a small doubleton in an unbid suit" or "much more often than that, when combined with the fact that RHO played T then Q from QJT9" but I'm not certain. If you're leading a small doubleton against 6NT (this also seems unadvisable in an unbid suit, of couse), it seems one might often lead low. The play from QJT9 was somewhat inspired, but it's a reasonable falsecard (you'll probably need to play QT or J9 to deceive). A related question: how often at 6NT should one signal accurately? I suppose that against a novice, you'd play them for J973. Against someone world class, do you still, or do you play for the other holding? If you play them for the latter, at what level of expertise do you start doing so? (Let's assume you don't know much about your opponents other than their skill level.) You are correct that if Hearts and clubs are split, regardless of who has the hearts and who has the clubs, there is a double squeeze with the spade 4 as the threat. But if you play for this and west has both of those suits you are down (if EAST has both hearts and clubs, of course, no squeeze for lack of U). You didn't mention, but if WEST has SPADE King, and 4-4 in hearts and clubs, he is triple squeezed to gain one trick, but that is just too darn easy. The play for the two double squeezes is quite different. In one, you need to cash the heart winners first (when you expect East has the hearts) and in the other you need to cash the club winners first (this is "RFL" from the book: Right, Free, Left). If you don't, you won't squeeze West (having not cashed your winners East's suit) by the time you need to toss either your spade exit card or a heart or a club from dummy. If you cash the heart winners, you'll find out who has the hearts. If it's East, you're fine, and you double squeeze. If it's West, you play your diamonds and spade Ace and you'll squeeze West in hearts and clubs if West's got the clubs too. If you cash your club winners, you'll again find out who has the clubs and if you're wrong and it's West, you'll go ahead and try for the single squeeze against West in hearts and clubs. (The two cases are entirely symmetric, except for information of course.) Andy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keylime Posted December 17, 2003 Report Share Posted December 17, 2003 This brings up another interesting note: what's the priority of signals versus slam contracts? Not a lot of pairs I've seen on BBO talk about this topic. Pard and I use predominantly count at 6/7 level. Very often it's to prevent a potential endplay/squeeze from developing - a radical departure from the usual defensive scheme that we nomrally use. In terms of leads, well...I won't disclose all of our secrets. B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrTodd13 Posted December 17, 2003 Report Share Posted December 17, 2003 Ben, Do you have a list of errata for Love's book?Todd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted December 17, 2003 Report Share Posted December 17, 2003 Ben, Do you have a list of errata for Love's book?Todd No, but I have a dog-eared copy with notes in the margin and along the bottom of the pages, and some expanded on the last few pages which were blank. I will pull it out and post one or two... nothing terribly glaring... if I remember, just overlook alternative play here or there that work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lenze Posted December 17, 2003 Report Share Posted December 17, 2003 Ben: Your copy sounds like mine!!! Actually, I have three copies, one by my bed, one in the John, and one at work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 Ok... I will post a few of my thoughts on some of the Clyde Love hands. Let's start with an easy one, Exercise 76... AQxx AQxx xx xxxJT987 KxxT98xx KJxxx JT96x T94 x x AKQxx AKQJxx NS bid 7NT (south) doubled helpfully by EAST. Opening lead the Spade JACK. T1. ACE wins, T2. Club both followT3. Club, West discards H2 Clyde suggest that East make South hesitate by dropping heart Jack four, and further help by dropping his nine of diamonds on the first round. I don't see how this helps at all. South has an EXTENDED threat in diamonds. The correct play (with 11 tricks) is after cashing clubs, play a heart to the ACE, if the king doesn't appear, run diamonds. I don't see how South can be fooled. Most of them are things like this, or things like on Excercise 106 he didn't mention that you have to be careful to unblcok the club 7 under the club King so that the Club 5 will be a second entry to south. I know he knew, and anyone really working out the hands see this as well (at least eventually). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lenze Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 Ben Wrote: Most of them are things like this, or things like on Excercise 106 he didn't mention that you have to be careful to unblcok the club 7 under the club King so that the Club 5 will be a second entry to south. I know he knew, and anyone really working out the hands see this as well (at least eventually). SO TRUE!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfgauss Posted August 29, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2005 I've been reading through Clyde Love's Bridge Squeezes Complete and came across this hand (Exercise 36), in which one was "supposed to" take standard inferences from a lead against 6NT. QT5AK8564A654 A4Q76AKQJ7K82 W N E S P 1DP 1H P 2NP 6N P PP West leads the 3 of clubs to East's Q and you duck. East continues with the club T and you win with the K (West plays the 7) and play two rounds of diamonds, all following. Now if clubs or hearts are 3-3 you're home. If not, there are various squeeze chances. [snip]Sorry for unearthing an ancient thread :), but I was rereading this chapter in Love's book recently and redid this problem and realize now that it's much worse than I originally thought. The squeeze chances interfere with finding 3-3 splits. Say you cash hearts and find righty with 4. Then you play for the double squeeze, but you have to decide whether to toss your club winner or your spade exit in North on the trick where you've squeezed West. So you need to guess whether West has 3 or 4 clubs. So you have to decide whether to play West for: One of:J73-Q109973-Q107 [edit: oops, I mean 973-QJ10] or J973-Q10 Both of the 3-3 splits are rather reasonable (ie considering the play of the opponents), so I'd really have to go with that. (Combined with my above stated view that nobody decent *ever* leads from J-fourth against 6NT -- again, thinking of this as a "real" problem instead of a "textbook" problem). [Note that the fact that finding the 3-3 splits interferes with the operations of the double squeeze(s) makes choosing which suit -- hearts or clubs -- to attack first either technically irrelevant (if you always choose to go for the 3-3 split when you find righty with 4 of the suit you attacked first... though not really irrelevant as you'll be watching lefty to see if he squirms) or rather odd if you'll play for 4-2: it's not immediately obvious which one to choose to attack if you, say, expect one suit to be more likely to be longer with one opp (I'll leave out the detailed analysis for now).] This is closer to a real "erratum" for the book, as Love doesn't mention this at all, and presumably if you were going to lead a 3 card suit in his day, you'd lead small (at least from J73). For textbook purposes, I guess every lead is supposed to be 4th (after all, you've gotta lead 4th from your longest & strongest against NT :)), which I guess I'm sort of ok with here. That said, does anyone have a squeeze problem book/collection (or just general declarer play, but including many squeeze hands) they know of that isn't devoted to "test driving" various squeezes but rather counting and drawing inferences in order to choose the correct squeeze or guess correctly which suit to discard/etc? I guess it seems hard to make such a collection, as you'd need to discuss the defenders' discards but wouldn't want to give away the setup of the squeeze. A two-page approach might work, where you flip the page and you've got a partial solution and all the discards listed and are at the critical juncture. Andy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted August 29, 2005 Report Share Posted August 29, 2005 Pard and I use predominantly count at 6/7 level. I wish all of my opponents did this. As always, you should just not signal unless partner needs it (which, if partner is able to use their brain, is rarely vs 6/7). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted August 30, 2005 Report Share Posted August 30, 2005 Hum.. why was the club lead ducked? If you take it in hand you can lead a spade towards dummy. Gives you an extra chance for 12 tricks if you happen to be lucky, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ng:) Posted August 30, 2005 Report Share Posted August 30, 2005 I love Love's book, but if u looking for some errors in his great work, here is another one: Clyde Love hands, Exercise 44. AQ542KQ9AJ662 10A543KQ7A8743 6NT by South. 1. West leads cK, East discads s9, Ace wins.2-3. Hearts. Both follow.4. Heart. East discards s3.5-6. Diamonds. Both follow. There is a mistake in his analysis: "After six tricks Declarer can claim his contract, because it is known that West has no more than one Spade. Cash DK to close the exit; then lead the Spade. If West plays low, let the Ten ride to East, for an ultimate return into the tenace." If East PLAYS LOW, the contract is down. So the correct play is: If West plays low, PLAY the ACE, then a small Spade, endplaying East. Gabor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted August 30, 2005 Report Share Posted August 30, 2005 Hum.. why was the club lead ducked? If you take it in hand you can lead a spade towards dummy. Gives you an extra chance for 12 tricks if you happen to be lucky, no? Its a squeeze book! :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfgauss Posted August 30, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 30, 2005 Hum.. why was the club lead ducked? If you take it in hand you can lead a spade towards dummy. Gives you an extra chance for 12 tricks if you happen to be lucky, no?If you assume all small-card leads vs NT are from 4 cards (ie if you assume that West has 4 clubs), then you always make (with his line). Indeed, his analysis begins "[t]he contract is assured" and the fact that you duck was part of the setup of the problem. Also, Fluffy, he doesn't exclude Whereagles line because "it's a squeeze book" -- indeed he makes a point of telling you when you shouldn't be squeezing and has a few hands sprinkled throughout to keep you on your toes -- it's just because he makes this "textbook" assumption. Let's analyze this, though (assuming diamonds break): by ducking the club, you'll make when (you have a choice between 1 & 2 corresponding to whether, when you test one suit and find east stopping it, you guess the other suit is 3-3 or 4-2): 1) clubs 3-3, hearts 3-3, west has both clubs & hearts 2) hearts 3-3, west has both clubs & hearts, east has hearts & west has clubs[could swap hearts & clubs here, but let's ignore the lead inferences for the moment] By winning the first club and playing a spade to the Queen, you'll make when (should prolly rattle off 4 diamonds before leading a spade to the Q, but this has nothing to do with the double dummy odds): 3) West has Spade K, Hearts 3-3, West has Spade J & stops Hearts(and then minor chances like either hand having 5 clubs and stopping hearts, which we haven't ruled out because we didn't duck the club -- though I guess this means West led small from J10973 or led a stiff. Also, this line has better chances when diamonds don't split than a ducking the club line.) [note that it's technically an equivalent line, but I suppose you should finesse the 10 and thus swap SK, SJ in the above because occasionally an opponent will hop SK] I haven't done the math, but it seems pretty clear that (3) is the winner, so nice catch (and it involves a squeeze as one of the chances :)). Andy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.