Squeeze

[kgr]

What is the best way to study Squeezes?

I know what positional squeezes, automatic squeezes, .. are But:

- Would like to recognise squeeze possibilities faster at the table. Probably this can be learned by studying the possible squeeze end possitions.

- Easier recognise how to play the hand.

 

Question:

- Any good articles about squeezes on the internet.

- What is the best book to study squeezes.

- Other tips on how to study and manage this are very welcome.

 

Thanks

[paulg]

Book: Bridge Squeezes Complete by Clyde Love

 

Richard Pavlicek's site is excellent too.

 

Paul

[whereagles]

Your mind identifies a squeeze situation via a mental process called pattern recognition. This means that at table you can identify a certain squeeze situation if the brain has seen it before. Kinda like you look at the cards at a certain stage and think "Hey.. I think I've seen this before." In practice this means reading books to peek at various squeeze layouts and their solutions, so that you can form your patterns.

 

Squeezes, because they work in patterns, are one of those thing where you can progress better by reading a book than from playing experience. Experience is however still important because it allows you to swap patterns more quickly, and to diagnose the need for a squeeze. For instance, it is usual to start looking for a squeeze pattern when you have, say, 8 tricks in 3NT but absolutely no finesse or break or endplay for a 9th.

 

As for books, I only read one, and it was not in english. However, I think Kelsey has a few boks on the subject and Kelsey is usually an excellent writer.

[nikos59]

A word of caution: beware "Bridge squeezes complete"

by Dr Love. It is easily the most opaquely-written bridge book in

English language. A main reason why most American bridge

players cannot squeeze is that American experts always

recommend this book. There is a French book on squeezes

(*not* the one of Romanet which is almost as opaque

as the Love opus) but if you insist in English try a newish

one by David Bird (there is the word 'squeeze' in the title')

 

nikos

[Flame]

Look at Bridge Guys.

[inquiry]

Well, let me have some fun here....

 

1) Whereagles is right, pattern recongnition, that is the key, more later.

2) Nikos59 is wrong twice, once that Clyde Love's book is the most opaquely-written bridge book in English language. He obviously has never read E. Eng's Bridge Squeeze Illustrated. One has to be a math major or a very serious student to get much out of his text, but let me tell you, if you are willing to spend the time, that is too, is an excellent book (very mathematical, uses algebria and theroums to show how squeezes work, and why). He is also wrong, Clyde love's book is the best... but it does require work to get. If you want to read some other book like you are readig the funny papers, you might learn something about squeeze, but you will not undertand.

 

I have an approach I use to teach squeezes. The basic principle is pattern regonition by grouping. The first step is to learn the most basic squeeze position (the automatic squeeze), and then start finding how that differs from a quard squeeze, or a triple squeeze of a compound squeeze.

 

Two examples, if you know the rules of a simple squeeze, you will run into a case where the rules (pattern) are violated. Say west guards one suit alone, but both of the other two suits are guarded by both players? This then becomes a compound squeeze (in Love's term).. the secret here is to know how to reconginze the problem with the simple squeeze, and then seeing this problem, know what the response to that is... See this squeeze hand I picked off correctly in a second due to this understanding.... Yzerman's compound squeeze hand and this has everything to do with pattern recongnition.

 

A second example is a guard squeeze. IF you know the requirements for a simple squeeze, you will know that there has to be an entry in of of the two threat suits opposite the squeeze card, and if the entry is in a threat suit held by the hand with the squeeze card, there has to be a reentry to that hand in one of the thread suits. If you recongnize this pattern is missing, you will look for things like a clash squeeze or a guard squeeze. In a guard squeeze, the thrid suit (not the two threat suits, no the squeeze card suit) will have to be partially finessable against the partner of the person being squeezed. This often requires some fancy unblocking in the suit in question to get the finessee right... but once you recongize the defect in the simple squeeze positon (and lack of entries are easy to identify), guard squeezes are quite easy to find, and unblocking becomes second nature. See for instance, this fine example of a complicated squeeze hand that includes guard squeeze as one of the options...

Lifemonster 6NT hand

 

Ben

[flytoox]

Take a doctoral course in sqz.

 

Reading list: Kelsey on sqz plaly.

[nikos59]

I stand corrected, Ben; in fact, Eng's book is more reader-hostile

that Love's, but it is a comparative rarity and it is almost

never proposed as a "must read". On the other hand, Love's

book is usually touted as such while, in my humble opinion,

it is extremely unreadable. Even the mnemotechnic rule

coined by Love (BLUE) seems ridiculous to me. Love is hopeless

in the simple cases which obviously are needed to proceed

to the more complicated ones.

 

But obviously this is my personal opinion and I may be

horribly wrong.

 

PS

When I get corrected, I like to hit back: it is not E.Eng, rather

Fook Eng or Hook or sth similar :rolleyes:

[inquiry]

I stand corrected, Ben; in fact, Eng's book is more reader-hostile

that Love's, but it is a comparative rarity and it is almost

never proposed as a "must read". On the other hand, Love's

book is usually touted as such while, in my humble opinion,

it is extremely unreadable. Even the mnemotechnic rule

coined by Love (BLUE) seems ridiculous to me. Love is hopeless

in the simple cases which obviously are needed to proceed

to the more complicated ones.

 

But obviously this is my personal opinion and I may be

horribly wrong.

 

PS

When I get corrected, I like to hit back: it is not E.Eng, rather

Fook Eng or Hook or sth similar :)

Well it is Fook... but, that doesn;t translate too well.. and I am not about the use the first letter of his real name with a space and his last name, this is a family time show.... so....

 

Strike back... :-)

 

As an aside, I actually enjoyed Dr. Eng's book. Still have it.

 

Ben

[pclayton]

I never liked Clyde Love's book either; although I know a lot of fine players that swear by it. Much prefer Kelsey's. The series has been reprinted as Kelsey on Squeeze Play. Read Eng years and years ago, don't remember much about it.

[jikl]

Doesn't BridgeMaster have a lot of squeeze hands in it? And then shows you how they worked? Also, going through the old Deals of the Week will show a lot of the positions, Fred also went to a lot of trouble in showing different plays not working. Perhaps this will be of help also.

 

Sean

[Flame]

I seriously doubt it matter to find which book has more data on squeezes, i will always prefer to read an enjoyable book to boring math one, im pretty sure the more enjoyable will find better ways into my skills, and this is the importent part, the skills should past from the book into your hands, the purpose is not to go back home after a turney open the book and see if here is a solution to the hand you played, the pupose is to know it at the table, i prefer to know 9 of 10 at the table because the 10th wasnt in my "enjoyable but not complete book" then make only 2 but have all the 10th in my book at home.

[whereagles]

Complicated double squeezes can get boring, but simple squeezes are nice to see and come up relatively frequently. Those aren't really "hi-tech" nor rocket science :)

[luke warm]

first, yes bridgemaster has a lot of squeezes in levels 4 & 5... i found them *very* educational

 

2nd, i agree that love's book is not the easiest read in the world, and wasn't my favorite, although if you can fight thru his arrogant sounding prose (just my opinion) some study of it can't help but benefit anyone.. never read eng, but i will order kelsey soon... is it written in the same style as his 'killing defense' books?

 

i should have said this the first time, but i've read 2 books on squeezes and imo bridgemaster is far better than either of them... i can't tell you, especially when i first got the program, how long it sometimes took to figure it out... as a stubborn sort, i hated using the incredibly good 'bridge movie' until i was just exhausted... sometimes i could almost feel my brain cells commiting suicide

Edited November 6, 2004 by luke warm

[pclayton]

Killing Defense is a problem on one page on the other, answer on the next. Repeat until crazy.

 

Squeeze Play is written like a text book, gives you example hands without a lot of the mumbo-jumbo teckkie language Love does. You're expected to know what terms like extended menace, split menace, and the like mean though. If you don't you can figure the stuff our easy enough. At the end of each of the four sections is a practical quiz.

[luke warm]

good... i know kelsey's 'k.d.' is considered a classic, but i was a little disappointed.. it wasn't the content, it was the way it was presented... think i'll go look to see who has the copyright, how much they'd charge if put on cd, and talk with fred over some tenn sippin' whiskey

 

you convinced me phil, i'll go to amazon now

[Flame]

I began to read about squeezes in the link given here to Richard pavlicek page, and i must say i like it.

[Chamaco]

A word of caution: beware "Bridge squeezes complete"

by Dr Love. It is easily the most opaquely-written bridge book in

English language. A main reason why most American bridge

players cannot squeeze is that American experts always

recommend this book. There is a French book on squeezes

(*not* the one of Romanet which is almost as opaque

as the Love opus) but if you insist in English try a newish

one by David Bird (there is the word 'squeeze' in the title')

 

nikos

Agree with Nikos on the overestimation of Clyde Love's book.

 

What I would look for in a book on squeeze would be:

 

1) outline of basic type of squeezes and how they work

2) FUNDAMENTAL: one or more specific chapter on how to recognize them early in the play and how to prepare them (and not only of list of example hands)

3) same as 1) and 2) for more advanced squeezes type.

 

Love's book lacks organization in this sesne.

The reason why most people praise it is simple: there was very little specific material on squeezes available before it was published.

 

Nowadays there is more to choose.

 

Having read Romanet's book I must say I found it much clearer than Love's book, because there are chapeters on squeezes diagnosis and preparation.

 

If there is a better french book, Nikos, could you please provide the title?

I'd be happy to get it.

 

Thanks

[slothy]

Like any other discipline, whether endplay, trump reduction, etc, the best way to learn squeeze play, as a topic in its own right, is to exploit that learning style which best suits you.

 

I have found that a lot of the literature focuses on the mechanics of squeeze play at the expense of discussing, to a healthy degree, when and when not to adopt it in favour of other potential lines of play, and why to go down the squeeze line rather than any other. Many seem to somehow ignore the defensive ploys of how to break a squeeze up!!

 

Hugh Kesley's book i found to be very educational and seemed to draw a nice balance, but perhaps in the wrong order :P).

 

I have never read Love's book so i wouldnt know. But then again i have deep suspicions for any person who has inherited the surname Love and decides to keep it!!!

 

The BridgeMaster series on BBO, especially 5 and 6, provide a nice interactive session with a few hands dedicated to squeeze play. My learning style is more conducive to this method so i found it rather instructional - I would recommend it to anyone who has a similar learning style.

 

But yet again i think the best way is to draw on various resources.

 

 

----

Read about it so you understand the mechanisms, at least the basic ones.

 

No point in trying to execute a squeeze if you have little idea what you doing (unless it's automatic :) ) and WHY YOU DOING IT. Hence the bridge books available.

 

 

----

Apply your knowledge* OK so you think you understand them????

 

Why not practice them on BBO (eg MasterBridge), in a non-threatening environment so that you are not putting yourself under a lot of pressure. If you just read a book say and your first test is in a team game and you think you got it and it turned out to be wrong, it can be quite demoralising..

 

 

----

Implement what you have learnt**

 

Analyse hands where you have gone off or taken a shaky line which you believe didnt look right and see if there was a squeeze which would have allowed you to make or improve your chances of making (eg unnecessary finesse), or even find 100% line. This, of course, may require the co-operation of a more experienced player to recognize the squeeze situation.

 

 

----

Kibbitz good players often.

 

If they made a hand on a squeeze, BELIEVE ME, they would be very willing to advertise the fact to the table and to the kibbers ;) Go over the hands and try and understand the thought processes of declarer.

 

-----------------------

 

* On this note i would like to ask Fred if he would be willing to have a few MasterBridge series concentrating on various play techniques i.e. categorised - like Squeeze Plays, End Plays, etc. i am sure it would drum up a lot of interest

 

** i am in the process of writing a hand generator and interactive play software for IE, with the aim of using it as a learning tool and focussing on declarer play. If i ever get round to finishing it :P will quite gladly make it available

 

Sloffy

[nikos59]

About the French bridge book:

 

I don't know if it is better, it is much more accessible.

 

It is an initiation book.

"Le squeeze simple pas a pas" by Berthe and Lebely.

Very well written.

[whereagles]

I think people were referring to Romanet's "Tout le Squeeze". That's where I learned squeezes from, but I have to admit it's pretty unreadable. It's written in academic style, but that suited me fine because I'm an academic as well, lol.

[Chamaco]

I think people were referring to Romanet's "Tout le Squeeze". That's where I learned squeezes from, but I have to admit it's pretty unreadable. It's written in academic style, but that suited me fine because I'm an academic as well, lol.

The Romanet book I read in Italian reported the translation from the following title:

 

"Le Squeeze au Bridge"

I ignore whether it is equivalent to the book mentioned by Whereagles and Nikos

 

I did not find it really complicated, but systematic.

 

Personally I find more complicated to study books which are written too simplistically.

 

Agree with all those who put emphasis on the need to explain clearly in the books the process of pattern recognition rather than the simple mechanics of the squeeze.

[whereagles]

Originally, Romanet's "Le Squeeze au Bridge" was a trilogy:

1. Simple squeezes

2. Double squeezes

3. Ruffing squeezes

Later on, the three volumes were bundled in a single book "Tout le Squeeze". That's, I think, how it went :rolleyes:

 

The french school is very good at doing things systematically. This approach is usually more abstract, but helps organizing your ideas better. Americans prefer to look at examples. This makes it easier to get into the subject, but harder to systematize what you learned. A matter of style, really. One should pick what one likes best.

[joker_gib]

Originally, Romanet's "Le Squeeze au Bridge" was a trilogy:

1. Simple squeezes

2. Double squeezes

3. Ruffing squeezes

Later on, the three volumes were bundled in a single book "Tout le Squeeze". That's, I think, how it went :rolleyes:

Absolutely right ! I have this book !

 

I also confirm that "Le squeeze simple pas à pas" is very well written and gives a very good approach of simple squeezes !

[kgr]

I started with Richard pavlicek page and it looks very interesting. I especially like the the rules given of how to finish the squeeze. A petty that it is mostly oriented to experts and that it doesn't start with the easier squeezes. (As far as I have seen now.)

 

I also like the post started by Inquiry. I didn't add a reply to his post because too much replies in it would make the post less readable. But at least I am interested in it.