[mfa1010]

gnasher, on 2010-November-18, 07:23, said:

If West unguards clubs, we throw a club, cross to ♣A, cash ♠K throwing a diamond, and cross back to ♦A.
If West unguards diamonds, we throw a diamond, cross to ♦K, cash ♠K throwing a club, and cross back to ♦A.

I assume you mean east?! West discards spades.

rhm, on 2010-November-18, 10:10, said:

True, I wanted to make this point as well, but the compound squeeze is admittedly of the restricted variety, where you have to make your decision after playing the penultimate ♥.

Is that not always the drawback of a compound squeeze that we have to guess what suit he abandoned? Since we need to cash the winners in that suit before playing the squeeze card.

[WellSpyder]

mfa1010, on 2010-November-18, 11:30, said:

Is that not always the drawback of a compound squeeze that we have to guess what suit he abandoned? Since we need to cash the winners in that suit before playing the squeeze card.

True, but if you compare the compound squeeze originally suggested by rhm (eg when LHO returns a 4th ♥) with the one suggested by gnasher (on a ♣ return) there is a significant difference. In the first case, you only have to decide which suit has been abandoned after LHO has had to make a further discard after the first part of the squeeze has already operated. In this case, the likelihood of being able to read what is going on is significantly higher than in the second case when you have to make the decision a trick earlier.

[mfa1010]

WellSpyder, on 2010-November-18, 11:39, said:

True, but if you compare the compound squeeze originally suggested by rhm (eg when LHO returns a 4th ♥) with the one suggested by gnasher (on a ♣ return) there is a significant difference. In the first case, you only have to decide which suit has been abandoned after LHO has had to make a further discard after the first part of the squeeze has already operated. In this case, the likelihood of being able to read what is going on is significantly higher than in the second case when you have to make the decision a trick earlier.

Maybe you are right, but I don't see it.

East eventually discards exactly one minor card in both instances on the penultimate heart. If we assume that he has then abandoned the minor he discards, we are in deep trouble if east shows up with a 6-4.

The contract has so great chance to make overall that uncertainty about card reading is a big issue in my opinion.

(Did you mean LHO=west or RHO=east where I have bolded the text? I'm confused).

[WellSpyder]

Sorry - I did indeed mean RHO.

The difference is that for the first compound squeeze, your discard on the penultimate ♥ does not have to vary according to what RHO discards. And indeed, neither does your discard on the last ♥, which you can play next, since you can come down to a doubleton in each minor. It is only after the last ♥ trick has been completed that you need to decide which minor to cash, and this depends on which has been unguarded. In the second case, the final ♥ has to come later, and the discard on the penultimate ♥ depends on which suit RHO abandons, so the ambiguity is more likely to cause a problem.

I do agre with your general point, though, that the problem of ambiguity is important when choosing between a line with a good chance of sucess anyway compared with one with 100% chance if you read the cards right but much worse if you don't - particularly since in the second case you can't try the "free" club finesse and still keep the entries sufficently fluid.

[mfa1010]

WellSpyder, on 2010-November-18, 12:16, said:

The difference is that for the first compound squeeze, your discard on the penultimate ♥ does not have to vary according to what RHO discards. And indeed, neither does your discard on the last ♥, which you can play next, since you can come down to a doubleton in each minor. It is only after the last ♥ trick has been completed that you need to decide which minor to cash, and this depends on which has been unguarded. In the second case, the final ♥ has to come later, and the discard on the penultimate ♥ depends on which suit RHO abandons, so the ambiguity is more likely to cause a problem.

You are right, but perhaps the difference is not so great after all.

Take the "ideal" compound situation, where hearts are Qxxx to x. West wins Q and returns hearts and we roll the rest of the suit. On all those hearts, east will discard 1 club and 1 diamond, what else? West will discard spades only.

If east now guards clubs (6124) we must now play ♦A-K.
If east instead guards diamonds (6142), we must now play ♣K-A to win. Alternatively, if we play ♦A-K we can still make by guessing to take a club finesse. But that would suddenly lose to east's 6133 with ♣Qxx.

I think this looks like a very nasty guess.

[nige1]

---

gnasher, on 2010-November-18, 07:23, said:

We can still play a compound squeeze. We win ♣K and cash hearts, coming down to:
If West unguards clubs, we throw a club, cross to ♣A, cash ♠K throwing a diamond, and cross back to ♦A.
If West unguards diamonds, we throw a diamond, cross to ♦K, cash ♠K throwing a club, and cross back to ♦A.

Quibble East not West. Great problem, Frances! At the table, I would have gone 4 down, as usual; but after long paper-analysis, I found the rhm/gnasher compound, independently. Cashing ♥AK is also a safety-play against losing to a doubleton ♥Q and presumably makes 13 tricks, as the cards lie