[lamford]

---

Teams

West leads the ace of diamonds and East plays the three, normal count, and West switches to four of clubs. If you duck, East will win and switch to the ten of spades. Plan the play.

[rhm]

If the hand is make-able the deal is an open book.
Obviously we have a loser in every side suit.
Therefor trumps must break and judging from the play in the minors West distribution should be be 5♠=2♥=3♦=3♣.

If we do not draw trumps we will run in a spade ruff and if we do we can ruff only one of our 2 black losers.
But you know West distribution.

Play a club to the ace and play 3 rounds of trumps ending in hand.

Now cash your club queen discarding a spade from dummy and play your last club.
Something interesting is going to happen:

---

When you play the ♣8 what is West going to discard?
Not a spade or you ruff in dummy and play a spade from there.
So West will discard his small diamond.

Now discard your spade from the table and let East win
You ruff the forced diamond return, which drops the king and dummy is high.

Rainer Herrmann

[lamford]

rhm, on 2017-February-25, 14:26, said:

If the hand is make-able the deal is an open book.
Rainer Herrmann

That was the layout, as you thought. If West has only two clubs, you cannot make it, I think.

[WellSpyder]

rhm, on 2017-February-25, 14:26, said:

Play a club to the ace and play 3 rounds of trumps ending in hand.

Now cash your club queen discarding a spade from dummy and play your last club.
Something interesting is going to happen:
When you play the ♣8 what is West going to discard?
Not a spade or you ruff in dummy and play a spade from there.
So West will discard his small diamond.

Now discard your spade from the table and let East win
You ruff the forced diamond return, which drops the king and dummy is high.

Rainer Herrmann

Very nice, Rainer.

As a matter of interest, do you expect to see a squeeze like this at the table at the point at which the problem is posed, or would you just notice that West is likely to be guarding both pointed suits and think that there is a good chance that he will find it impossible to hold the position when the time comes? It seems to me that this squeeze has some relatively unusual elements, which makes it less easy to visualise at an early stage unless you have seen similar positions before.

[rhm]

WellSpyder, on 2017-February-28, 11:52, said:

Very nice, Rainer.

As a matter of interest, do you expect to see a squeeze like this at the table at the point at which the problem is posed, or would you just notice that West is likely to be guarding both pointed suits and think that there is a good chance that he will find it impossible to hold the position when the time comes? It seems to me that this squeeze has some relatively unusual elements, which makes it less easy to visualise at an early stage unless you have seen similar positions before.

To be honest I would be proud to see this at the table.
Unfortunately I misplay far easier hands.

Rainer Herrmann

[lamford]

rhm, on 2017-March-03, 04:22, said:

To be honest I would be proud to see this at the table.
Unfortunately I misplay far easier hands.
Rainer Herrmann

I did not find this at the table, but they misdefended.