Count Rectification is not always helpful for Squeeze
This hand appeared in the pairs (Match Point) elimination of last Delhi Gymkhana Tournament held in 1st week of this month. The auction went
I got S lead and dummy appeared:
I took the S A and played D K which was ducked around, played D Q and D J appeared, RHO took the 3rd D (LHO discarded a H) and shifted to H. I played small from hand and LHO took the trick with H Q, I discarded H J from dummy. Next I won the C return and ran all diamonds but could not succeed to generate the 11th trick as I had to discard either H or C on last D which destroys the possibility of double squeeze.
I took some time to finish the hand and Sumit and Laltu were waiting to take our seat as they were following us as EW. Sumit saw last few tricks played and asked me why I could not conduct the double squeeze, I dint think that the double squeeze was there and communicated that to him and that ended the discussion. On next day morning, I received a phone call from Sumit regarding that hand. He again asked me why the double squeeze was not there, and we started analyzing the hand. After a while we discovered that the double squeeze was on at his table but not at my table because one more trick was played in my table. In his table, everything was identical except the initial S lead. C was led, H was played after D A and second C was returned. So, the S A was not played and that made the double squeeze possible. Instead of 10 cards, there was a 9-card ending at his table, RHO maintained 3S and C Q and the declare kept 1S 2H and CJ, now on H A RHO had to throw the S and dummy’s small S became the 11th trick. The ability of discarding 1 more S saved declare from getting squeezed before his LHO.
What I found interesting about the hand is, we generally always try to play maximum number of tricks to make the squeeze possible, however that generic practice would be counterproductive for this deal.
This is actually a great example of Non material squeeze by defence. On the table where squeeze operated – the position when the last diamond is cashed is S AKx Hx DT opp xx AT – J. On the last diamond, declarer can easily pitch a spade and then cross to Heart Ace to give force to both his heart and club menaces.
The subtle difference is that when defence plays one round of spade, declarer doesn’t have a spare card to throw on last diamond without destroying either a menace or the communication (become void in spade)
Salute Mr.Ottlik
Assuming from the description that N has the CQ, and S has the H guard, in terms of the terminology used by Clyde Love, the position after 1 spade has been played requires a B1 (RFL) type of double squeeze ( Sp is the B (both) suit, Cl is the L suit, and Ht is the R suit, Di is F — free winners), with Cl Jack as the basic threat. The winners cannot be cashed in the RFL order in this hand without destroying the entries, and so the squeeze fails.
When no S has been played, it results in a B2 type squeeze, with less stringent requirements, so the squeeze works. This is why one of the recommended defenses to double squeeze is to attack the entry to the B suit.