frequency of Squeezes

[ArcLight]

In Terence Reeses excellent book "Squeeze play made easy" he says there are squeeze possibilities of perhaps 1 in 6 hands (I'm not sure what is meant by "possibilities" - maybe defenders discard poorly, pseudo squeeze, alternative line of play)

 

In Mike Lawrences excellent software Counting at Bridge he estimate that squeezes occur in 1 out of 30 hands. He also says that simple squeezes make up the vast bulk of all squeezes.

 

1/6 (16%) is vey different from 1/30 (3.3%) even if both are approximations.

 

Roughly how often do squeezes occur?

[matmat]

there is a substantial difference between a possible squeeze and an operating squeeze. Are you sure that is not what is meant here?

[helene_t]

My guess is that those 1/6 include squeezes that don't work (because the honours do not split as required by the squeeze) or are not played for by declarer, for example because an alternative line of play had better odds.

[Gerben42]

On a club night you play 27 hands, so on average you declare 7 times. Of these 7 times, I usually have 1 or 2 hands where squeeze considerations come into play. So 1/6 doesn't sound strange.

[Rossoneri]

I would tend to believe 1 in 30 rather than 1 in 6. If it's 1 in 6, I've never ever seen such good odds on the hand records from my local club's duplicating machine.

[DJNeill]

Hi,

I think at a local club, "pressure" adds up to as much extra tricks for me as operating squeezes. Pressure (or a light draft) leads to operating squeezes that never should have existed. So in a bad field, there are more squeezes.

 

Thanks,

Dan

[helene_t]

I don't think the statistics include pseudo-squeezes :blink:

 

I wonder if the frequency of squeezes and pseudosqueezes in actual play could be queried with BridgeBrowser ?

[P_Marlowe]

On a club night you play 27 hands, so on average you declare 7 times. Of these 7 times, I usually have 1 or 2 hands where squeeze considerations come into play. So 1/6 doesn't sound strange.

If I interprete your statement correct, 1 or 2 of the 7 hands

you are playing as declarer involve squeeze considerations,

I would say, this sounds like 1/6.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Finch]

It really depends on how you count them. There was a hand from two nights ago when my partner was in 3NT. He took a totally normal line, trying to do an avoidance play with Axx opposite K1098x to lose the lead into the safe hand, and when that failed he was still making with a key card onside, but went two off. Alternatively he could have cashed three winners in the suit led which would have triple-squeezed an opponent and allowed him to get out for one off instead. Only Deep Finesse would have taken this line (as it's playing for one off rather than to make) and DF would have been in 2NT.

 

Here's another hand:

 

[hv=n=sakxhkxxxdkqxckqx&s=sxxhqxxxdajxxcajx]133|200|[/hv]

 

Playing in 3NT you receive a minor suit lead. After a heart to the king and ace (say) you will make 11 tricks on a simple squeeze if the same hand has 5 spades and 3 hearts. Pretty unlikely, but it might happen.

 

If you count both of these hands as 'possible squeezes' then I would say they are at least 1 in 6, possibly more often.

 

If you only count hands where declarer correctly decides to play for a squeeze, and is successful, then the occurrence is much less, maybe 1 in 30 is about right.

[Guest Jlall]

8.72 %

[gnasher]

In Europe it's nearer to 8.9%, because we bid more than you do.

[jdonn]

In Europe it's nearer to 8.9%, because we bid more than you do.

I thought it was because we lead more aggressively and thus break up more squeezes :)

[pigpenz]

I don't think the statistics include pseudo-squeezes :)

 

I wonder if the frequency of squeezes and pseudosqueezes in actual play could be queried with BridgeBrowser ?

probably not, but you could ask Stephen

problem is you can set constraints for hands, like 4-4 in majors and if you do a search it will only show you the hands that fit that criteria.

 

So most likely you would have to do a general search like say auction goes

1♥ 3♥

4♥ First, then

do a search on the same auction where the defenders have specific holdings.

 

then divide the second by the first for %

 

might actually be easier to a simulation, then pick hands from simulator that fit for defenders hands.

[EricK]

Having read "Bridge with the Blue Team", I can confirm that squeeze opportunities crop up on about 3/4 of all hands, and the opponents' cards are positioned right for the squeeze on about 90% of those.

[benlessard]

I think that what is important is how often a squeeze is the best line wheiter it work or not.

 

Most of the time a finesse will be as good or better than a squeeze so for me that is not pertinent even if the squeeze work and the finesse fail.

 

Often you are in a pretty hopeless contract and are looking for a lucky break even if the squeeze has little chance of working its pertinent because at the other table the guy might be in the same contract and find the squeeze possibility.

[SoTired]

I remember a top expert told me that squeezes are rare, but endplays come up quite frequently.

 

So if you want to improve, watch out for more endplays then squeezes.

[ArcLight]

Having read "Bridge with the Blue Team", I can confirm that squeeze opportunities crop up on about 3/4 of all hands, and the opponents' cards are positioned right for the squeeze on about 90% of those.

LOL!

 

That was my take also on reading the book.

A double squeeze comes up 50% of the time. And it usually works :)

[Gerben42]

From an independent source, "Adventures in Card play", I can confirm this statistic.

[ASkolnick]

I actually think both stats could be right.

 

I think there is a difference between a squeeze possibility and a squeeze.

 

Let's take a one-sided squeeze, one could say that a squeeze possibility existed on this hand if LHO holds both threat cards.

 

However, it is not actually a squeeze unless LHO does hold both threat cards.

 

So, there could be a 2-1 type ratio of possibility to actual squeezes.

[OleBerg]

"squeeze ***possibilities*** of perhaps 1 in 6 hands"

Sounds about right.

[Rossoneri]

I was playing pairs at my local club last night, and I found myself in a 3NT contract which looked like it depended on clubs breaking 3-3. I pulled off the squeeze playing RHO for 4 clubs and 4 hearts which seemed very likely, and this was a shared top since 4 tables went down in 3NT and only one other table made it. (Yes I know, 6 tables is a small game by normal standards.)

 

Next board, I found myself in 3DX after a competitive auction, and I went down 1 because....I forgot my last spade was good and I ruffed it away. From a top to a bottom.

 

And to think I was originally happy because this is the first time I've ever successfully pulled of a squeeze to make a contract. (Previous time was for an overtrick, and at IMPs scoring.)

 

Moral of the story: If you want to pull off a squeeze, be sure that you can declare non squeeze lines properly first.

[kenrexford]

Squeezes come up slightly more if you include the Grosvenor Squeeze.

 

Every so often, I find myself in some ridiculous contract where I know that I am destined for a bottom result (or damned close). When that happens, I hate playing the 13 cards just to get it done, because the opponents, realizing that I'm doubled, go into the tank to gain that 1400 rather than 1100 against the par of 110. Matchpoints! Where you risk 1100 to gain 50.

 

Anyway, when this happens, I sometimes amuse myself by intentionally crashing two winners together if this sets up a possible squeeze position to get the trick right back. That way, it is interesting for me, and I get to steal the thunder from the opponents, who feel like somehow they might lose to the field who scores up 1400 when they only scored 1100. They start bickering, and I win the next board easily.

[OleBerg]

Squeezes come up slightly more if you include the Grosvenor Squeeze. 

 

Every so often, I find myself in some ridiculous contract where I know that I am destined for a bottom result (or damned close).  When that happens, I hate playing the 13 cards just to get it done, because the opponents, realizing that I'm doubled, go into the tank to gain that 1400 rather than 1100 against the par of 110.  Matchpoints!  Where you risk 1100 to gain 50.

 

Anyway, when this happens, I sometimes amuse myself by intentionally crashing two winners together if this sets up a possible squeeze position to get the trick right back.  That way, it is interesting for me, and I get to steal the thunder from the opponents, who feel like somehow they might lose to the field who scores up 1400 when they only scored 1100.  They start bickering, and I win the next board easily.

I often use that tactic myself, though not intentionally.

[kenrexford]

Squeezes come up slightly more if you include the Grosvenor Squeeze. 

 

Every so often, I find myself in some ridiculous contract where I know that I am destined for a bottom result (or damned close).  When that happens, I hate playing the 13 cards just to get it done, because the opponents, realizing that I'm doubled, go into the tank to gain that 1400 rather than 1100 against the par of 110.  Matchpoints!  Where you risk 1100 to gain 50.

 

Anyway, when this happens, I sometimes amuse myself by intentionally crashing two winners together if this sets up a possible squeeze position to get the trick right back.  That way, it is interesting for me, and I get to steal the thunder from the opponents, who feel like somehow they might lose to the field who scores up 1400 when they only scored 1100.  They start bickering, and I win the next board easily.

I often use that tactic myself, though not intentionally.

LOL!

 

I forgot about that squeeze, which does come up a lot. The old "I screwed the pooch early and now I need a steppingstone squeeze to get back to par" squeeze.