[CSGibson]

---

I had a fun time last Sunday with a day of bridge at the club, including the first progressive squeeze I've been a part of where I knew it at the time (helped by the opponents, of course). Anyway, you can advance to the play until you see the squeeze position if you are interested.

And yes, I did take the club hook to score it up.

[billw55]

How cool. And satisfying that east can see quite plainly what is happening to him.

[bluecalm]

Haha, very nice position, quite early in the play too

[Phil]

CSGibson, on 2012-March-13, 17:46, said:

And yes, I did take the club hook to score it up.

Oh, so your RHO didn't defend as well as you played it?

[CSGibson]

Phil, on 2012-March-14, 08:50, said:

Oh, so your RHO didn't defend as well as you played it?

I don't know what you mean by this. I don't think I played it well or not well - it worked on this layout, and the defense didn't work on this layout. My taking the club hook was strictly motivated by the fact that it may be a progressive squeeze, not because I felt it was on.

[Phil]

CSGibson, on 2012-March-14, 09:57, said:

I don't know what you mean by this. I don't think I played it well or not well - it worked on this layout, and the defense didn't work on this layout. My taking the club hook was strictly motivated by the fact that it may be a progressive squeeze, not because I felt it was on.

You hand is hidden, right? Why does your RHO know you have the ♣Q?

[WellSpyder]

Phil, on 2012-March-14, 10:43, said:

You hand is hidden, right? Why does your RHO know you have the ♣Q?

He doesn't. And he can see the 4-card suits in dummy. So his first discard should indeed be a ♣. But you still need to finesse to bring in the suit.

[Phil]

WellSpyder, on 2012-March-14, 10:54, said:

He doesn't. And he can see the 4-card suits in dummy. So his first discard should indeed be a ♣. But you still need to finesse to bring in the suit.

You are half right.

[gwnn]

Why can't you just write what you think the right defence is Phil? I would like to know because I'm not so good at defence, let alone squeeze defence.

[CSGibson]

Phil, on 2012-March-14, 10:43, said:

You hand is hidden, right? Why does your RHO know you have the ♣Q?

Wellspyder beat me to it, but I also want to say this: Quit beating around the bush, and actually come to your point. I know you can read, so I know you know I never said he "knows" I have the Q. He also doesn't know I have 6 clubs. The club, which is the discard he made at the table, is clearly his best bet.

I'm guessing that the point you are getting to eventually after leading me parsimoniously through your very deliberate thought process is that because he discarded a club, establishing my extended menace, there was no actual squeeze progression and therefore my characterization of this as a progressive squeeze as opposed to a three suit squeeze with a potential progressive squeeze position is incorrect.

If that's what your getting at (and mind you, I'm just guessing since you've been so indirect &, if I'm reading this right, passive-aggressive), then why even comment? Did I annoy you because you perceived this as some sort of bragging, even though I explicitly stated that this was a result of the defensive maneuvering, as opposed to any brilliance on my own part? Or are you really that nit-picky about squeeze positions?

[MickyB]

I think Phil is hinting that East should pitch the K♣, that's based more on his words than the hand itself

[Phil]

CSGibson, on 2012-March-14, 11:09, said:

Wellspyder beat me to it, but I also want to say this: Quit beating around the bush, and actually come to your point. I know you can read, so I know you know I never said he "knows" I have the Q. He also doesn't know I have 6 clubs. The club, which is the discard he made at the table, is clearly his best bet.

Chris, I never commented on on your line except to compliment it. I focused on your RHO's defense. Hopefully you can see why a low club isn't the right pitch, regardless of whether or not you think declarer has five or six clubs. See MickyB's comment who appears to be a better mind reader and analyst than you.

Quote

I'm guessing that the point you are getting to eventually after leading me parsimoniously through your very deliberate thought process is that because he discarded a club, establishing my extended menace, there was no actual squeeze progression and therefore my characterization of this as a progressive squeeze as opposed to a three suit squeeze with a potential progressive squeeze position is incorrect.

If that's what your getting at (and mind you, I'm just guessing since you've been so indirect &, if I'm reading this right, passive-aggressive), then why even comment? Did I annoy you because you perceived this as some sort of bragging, even though I explicitly stated that this was a result of the defensive maneuvering, as opposed to any brilliance on my own part? Or are you really that nit-picky about squeeze positions?

Interesting stream of consciousness. Wrong, but interesting.

[JLOGIC]

CSGibson, on 2012-March-14, 11:09, said:

Wellspyder beat me to it, but I also want to say this: Quit beating around the bush, and actually come to your point. I know you can read, so I know you know I never said he "knows" I have the Q. He also doesn't know I have 6 clubs. The club, which is the discard he made at the table, is clearly his best bet.

I'm guessing that the point you are getting to eventually after leading me parsimoniously through your very deliberate thought process is that because he discarded a club, establishing my extended menace, there was no actual squeeze progression and therefore my characterization of this as a progressive squeeze as opposed to a three suit squeeze with a potential progressive squeeze position is incorrect.

If that's what your getting at (and mind you, I'm just guessing since you've been so indirect &, if I'm reading this right, passive-aggressive), then why even comment? Did I annoy you because you perceived this as some sort of bragging, even though I explicitly stated that this was a result of the defensive maneuvering, as opposed to any brilliance on my own part? Or are you really that nit-picky about squeeze positions?

He was definitely saying east should pitch the CQ to establish an entry for his partners hypothetical Qx of clubs. If he pitches a low club now when you lead a club off you can keep RHO on lead.

He was not being passive-aggressive he was just trying to be clever/coy in an "I-know-more-than-you-figure-it-out" kind of way. It is Phil afterall

[JLOGIC]

Nice hand but running the SJ at trick 2 seems like a really strange line. Admittedly doing something like diamond to the king, and running the CT does seem to get awkward, and possibly even more awkward if they cover the CT, so maybe it's not as strange as it seems at first glance. Still, I think I would just take my chances going after clubs, often opponents will clear hearts anyways, esp if the SK is on.

[Phil]

JLOGIC, on 2012-March-14, 11:47, said:

Nice hand but running the SJ at trick 2 seems like a really strange line. Admittedly doing something like diamond to the king, and running the CT does seem to get awkward, and possibly even more awkward if they cover the CT, so maybe it's not as strange as it seems at first glance. Still, I think I would just take my chances going after clubs, often opponents will clear hearts anyways, esp if the SK is on.

I has considered this too, but its matchpoints and playing the spade first definitely leaves things 'less awkward' when you are playing for the max, but I'm in and out of the forums this morning and haven't given the alternate line a whole lot of thought.

[CSGibson]

Phil, on 2012-March-14, 11:40, said:

Chris, I never commented on on your line except to compliment it. I focused on your RHO's defense. Hopefully you can see why a low club isn't the right pitch, regardless of whether or not you think declarer has five or six clubs. See MickyB's comment who appears to be a better mind reader and analyst than you.



Interesting stream of consciousness. Wrong, but interesting.

Fair enough. It doesn't surprise me that Micky B is a better mind reader & analyst. Of course, if you actually said what you were thinking the first time, mind reading skills wouldn't play into this.

[JLOGIC]

Phil, on 2012-March-14, 11:52, said:

I has considered this too, but its matchpoints and playing the spade first definitely leaves things 'less awkward' when you are playing for the max, but I'm in and out of the forums this morning and haven't given the alternate line a whole lot of thought.

If the spade jack loses to the king and they come back a heart and duck we are in pretty bad shape having not developed clubs at all. I don't know what "playing for the max" means but I think the spade finesse loses at least half the time. I mean, yes, we can make 4 with Kxx of clubs on AND 5-2 hearts. However, we will often make 5 on that if we play a diamond up and play a club, seems like the max to me. AFAIK we don't always have to lose a spade when the spade finesse is off, we can pitch it on the DQ (even legitimately so if RHO has KJx of clubs).

We also really have no clue what to do if the SJ holds. Probably RHO has the king now, but it's not a lock, and we're still not in great shape. It seems like if we're going to play a spade, a spade to the queen would be better to avoid this. It also avoids the SJ getting covered, and then them running spades easily when clubs go badly (true, LHO can get in and play the SK but it will be harder).

I dunno, just seems like a strange play. It is not really playing for the max, it is really playing safe in a way because you are avoiding your diamond entry getting shut out before clubs are set up. Something like diamond to the king, C9 CJ CQ CK could be quite ugly but it doesn't seem that likely.

[billw55]

deleted nonsense

[JLOGIC]

billw55, on 2012-March-14, 12:16, said:

nitpicking maybe, but I think a low club discard is technically ok, east can still play the ♣K on the first round right?

No, south could duck.

[billw55]

dang you beat me to it! lol you are fast