An unexpectedly made contract

[smerriman]

[hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?nn=Human&n=ST874HAKQ76DJ7C62&en=Robot&e=SK5HT98432D93CQ43&sn=smerriman&s=SAJ2HJ5DA64CAK875&wn=Robot&w=SQ963HDKQT852CJT9&d=s&v=o&b=17&a=1C2D(Aggressive%20weak%20jump%20overcall%20--%206+%20%21D%3B%204-9%20HCP)2HP3DP3HP3NPPP&p=DKD7D3D4DQDJD9D6DTS4H4DAHJS9H6H2H5D2HKH3HAH9C5D8HQHTC7D5S7S5SJSQS6S8SKSACACJC2C3S2S3STC4C6CQCKC9C8CTH7H8]400|300[/hv]

 

When West showed out on the first heart, it seemed like my only hope was East holding KQ of spades.

 

On running the hearts I was surprised to see robot West throw all three diamonds, allowing me to make the contract.

 

But afterwards, I was even more surprised to see that the contract is unbeatable - West is subjected to an extremely interesting squeeze without the count, with East under pressure also (at risk of being thrown in with the king of spades if he doesn't fly with it).

 

Does this have a name, and is it actually one that declarer should get right if a human made some less obvious discards?

[FelicityR]

I hazard a guess it's a type of strip squeeze, but I'd have to look in Clyde E. Love's book to give a name to it.

[pescetom]

I assume you mean that West discarded all three clubs.

[smerriman]

I assume you mean that West discarded all three clubs.

No, three diamonds (click Next to see the play).

[Cyberyeti]

No, three diamonds (click Next to see the play).

 

Well he can't ever afford to discard a club or you can duck a club to E, and if he discards down to 2 spades you can duck a spade to E, so he has to ditch the diamonds. Once he has insufficient to beat you, you can take advantage of the spade position. It also works if you win the second diamond and leave him one to cash.

[pescetom]

No, three diamonds (click Next to see the play).

 

On a screen big enough to click Next now, got it (not what I would call 'discard').

Yes it's neat the way West gets squeezed by almost anything reasonable you do.

[nige1]

[hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?n=HT432SKQJ32D32C32&e=HKJST98765D76CJ97&s=HA65SA4DA54CAK654&d=s&v=o&b=17&a=3NPPPf]400|300|

Thank you, SMerriman, for the interesting deal

(reformatted to fit my predilections, on the left)

It features

- South must win West's second ♦ lead.

- Triple squeeze (3 short of the count) on West (when Declarer runs North's spades)

- Avoidance play on East (if West discards 2 ♥s).

[/hv]

[FelicityR]

I now know why I get so confused with squeezes :( There are just so many! In an effort to find a definitive name for this type of triple squeeze I came across the following:-

 

Copyright Richard Pavilcek. I trust that he wouldn't mind his analysis of squeezes added to this entry as they are on the internet for all to view, and they gave me a joyous couple of hours of finally admitting that I could never attain this level of bridge in my advanced years. Mr Pavilcek, like Mr Love, is a genius. Maybe I should stick to dominoes with my husband :)

 

I hope you enjoy them as much as I did.

 

http://www.rpbridge.net/9m01.htm

[pescetom]

Mr Pavilcek, like Mr Love, is a genius.

 

After a year of bridge I was none the wiser and would have quit had I not found his web site which finally exposed some clear logic.

Thank you Richard!

[kuhchung]

My friend calls this a winner squeeze - you can't unguard anything so you ditch your winners.

 

I think Kevin and Debbie Rosenberg call this a dad squeeze. It may not be the exact same theme, but it had to do with something like this.

 

Also, I have accidentally made hands like this as well. I thought the defense just discarded very poorly, but no, they're just in a lot of trouble.

 

Running winners is strong!