Pseudo-squeeze is a type of deceptive play in contract bridge. The declarer goes through the motions of executing a genuine squeeze where none exists, in the hope that a defender misreads the actual position and misdefends. The pseudo-squeeze simply gives the defender able to recognize the possibility of a squeezed position a chance to go wrong.
| ♠ | 4 | Example 1 | |
| ♥ | 6 | ||
| ♦ | — | ||
| ♣ | A | ||
N | ♠ | K Q | |
| ♥ | A | ||
| ♦ | — | ||
| ♣ | — | ||
| ♠ | A J | ||
| ♥ | K | ||
| ♦ | — | ||
| ♣ | — | ||
Consider the simple legitimate positional squeeze in Example 1 where South is declarer requiring all remaining tricks and has the lead in dummy:
The ♣A is led from dummy and East is genuinely squeezed between hearts and spades.
|
| Example 2 | ♠ | 4 | |||
| ♥ | 6 | ||||
| ♦ | — | ||||
| ♣ | A | ||||
| ♠ | J 3 | N | ♠ | K Q | |
| ♥ | 4 | ♥ | A | ||
| ♦ | — | ♦ | — | ||
| ♣ | — | ♣ | — | ||
| ♠ | A 2 | ||||
| ♥ | K | ||||
| ♦ | — | ||||
| ♣ | — | ||||
Now consider an alternate layout which from East's perspective could be identical to that above.
In double-dummy play, on the play of the ♣A, East can safely throw a spade, as his partner still guards South's ♠2 menace. However, East cannot see declarer's hand and if he throws the ♥A, then he has been pseudo-squeezed.
| Example 3 | ♠ | 4 | |||
| ♥ | 6 | ||||
| ♦ | — | ||||
| ♣ | A | ||||
| ♠ | 3 2 | N | ♠ | K Q | |
| ♥ | K | ♥ | A | ||
| ♦ | — | ♦ | — | ||
| ♣ | — | ♣ | — | ||
| ♠ | A J | ||||
| ♥ | 4 | ||||
| ♦ | — | ||||
| ♣ | — | ||||
In another layout, if East throws a spade on the ♣A, South makes the rest of the tricks.
A memory squeeze is a sub-class of pseudo-squeeze where the declarer plays hoping that an opponent has forgotten (or not been paying attention) to the exact cards of a suit. The most basic example:
| ♠ | K | ||
| ♥ | 3 | ||
| ♦ | — | ||
| ♣ | |||
N | ♠ | A | |
| ♥ | — | ||
| ♦ | A | ||
| ♣ | — | ||
| ♠ | — | ||
| ♥ | ? | ||
| ♦ | K | ||
| ♣ | — | ||
Declarer leads the ♥3. East realizes that declarer has the last heart, but has not been paying attention (or forgotten) which heart declarer has. If it is the 2, the lead for the last trick will be in dummy and East must keep the ♠Ace. If it is anything else, declarer will overtake and win the trick, so East must keep the ♦Ace. Declarer is playing for East to have forgotten and guess wrong.
Defenders can sometimes avoid being taken in by pseudo-squeezes if they count and signal accurately. Many times, however, the position is simply too difficult. Consider this layout, constructed by Clyde E. Love: [1]
| ♠ | K 4 | ||||
| ♥ | 8 7 5 3 | ||||
| ♦ | A K Q 7 5 4 | ||||
| ♣ | 8 | ||||
| ♠ | J 8 7 5 3 | N | ♠ | 10 9 2 | |
| ♥ | J 10 9 6 | ♥ | 4 2 | ||
| ♦ | 10 6 2 | ♦ | J 9 8 3 | ||
| ♣ | 10 | ♣ | J 7 5 4 | ||
| ♠ | A Q 6 | ||||
| ♥ | A K Q | ||||
| ♦ | — | ||||
| ♣ | A K Q 9 6 3 2 | ||||
South plays 7NT and West leads the ♥J. As a genuine threat, North's diamonds are useless because they cannot be run, South has no diamond entry to support a genuine squeeze, and three diamond tricks only are no help. South has 13 tricks if the clubs break 3-2, but what if they break 4-1? In that case, only a club discard from length will help.
So South cashes the hearts and then the ♠K, ♠A and ♠Q. It cannot hurt to cut the link between the North and South hands because, as noted, North's diamonds are useless.
But East has a real problem on the sixth major suit trick, because the position makes East believe that he is squeezed. South "obviously" has at least one diamond because he didn't cash diamonds when the lead was in dummy with the ♠K. So, East thinks he must keep his diamonds and hope that West can help guard the clubs, but as soon as East discards a club South has 13 tricks. As Love states, "It would take an imbecile or a genius to discard a diamond!" Notice that neither counting nor a defensive signal can help East here – the crucial decision comes too early.
Here is a pseudo-squeeze by Victor Mollo: [2]
| ♠ | 6 5 4 | ||||
| ♥ | 8 7 6 | ||||
| ♦ | K J 3 2 | ||||
| ♣ | K 8 7 | ||||
| ♠ | K Q J | N | ♠ | 10 9 8 7 | |
| ♥ | J 5 4 3 | ♥ | K Q 10 9 | ||
| ♦ | 9 7 5 4 | ♦ | Q 10 8 6 | ||
| ♣ | 5 4 | ♣ | 6 | ||
| ♠ | A 3 2 | ||||
| ♥ | A 2 | ||||
| ♦ | A | ||||
| ♣ | A Q J 10 9 3 2 | ||||
The players were the Hideous Hog (South), Papa the Greek (West) and Molly the Mule (East).
Against the Hog's 6♣ Papa led the ♠K. With only one winner in dummy to take care of three losers in hand, the Hog went for the swindle. He won the ♠A and ran his clubs, stranding dummy's ♦K in the process. Both Papa and Molly thought that the Hog had ♦Ax in his hand – with the bare ♦A, the Hog would have cashed the diamond tops before cutting himself off from dummy.
The position with six cards left was:
| ♠ | 6 5 | ||||
| ♥ | 8 | ||||
| ♦ | K J 3 | ||||
| ♣ | — | ||||
| ♠ | Q J | N | ♠ | — | |
| ♥ | J 4 | ♥ | K Q 9 | ||
| ♦ | 9 7 | ♦ | Q 10 8 | ||
| ♣ | — | ♣ | — | ||
| ♠ | 3 2 | ||||
| ♥ | A 2 | ||||
| ♦ | A | ||||
| ♣ | J | ||||
When the Hog led his final club, Papa thought that he had to keep two diamonds. If he came down to the ♦9, the Hog would cash his ♦A and lead toward dummy's ♦KJ. Papa would show out and the Hog would drop Molly's ♦Q. Papa could not throw a spade, because that would allow the Hog to establish a small spade as his twelfth trick. So Papa threw the ♥4. Papa was pseudo-squeezed.
Then Molly chose to throw the ♥9 in order to retain her diamond guard. She was pseudo-squeezed as well, although earlier she had relied on Papa to keep the ♥Jx, so that she could eventually unblock under the ♥A. The Hog cashed the ♥A and ♦A and threw Molly in with a heart to lead up to the ♦KJ.
In contract bridge and similar games, a finesse is a type of card play technique which will enable a player to win an additional trick or tricks should there be a favorable position of one or more cards in the hands of the opponents.
In contract bridge, a simultaneous double squeeze is a double squeeze in which both opponents are squeezed by the same card, as opposed to non-simultaneous double squeeze where the two opponents are squeezed in different tricks.
The simple squeeze is the most basic form of a squeeze in contract bridge. When declarer plays a winner in one suit, an opponent is forced to discard a stopper in one of declarer's two threat suits.
Safety play in contract bridge is a generic name for plays in which declarer maximizes the chances for fulfilling the contract by ignoring a chance for a higher score. Declarer uses safety plays to cope with potentially unfavorable layouts of the opponent's cards. In so doing, declarer attempts to ensure the contract even in worst-case scenarios, by giving up the possibility of overtricks.
In the card game of contract bridge, to hold up means to play low to a trick led by the opponents, losing it intentionally in order to sever their communication. The primary purpose is to give as many tricks to opponents as needed to exhaust all the cards in the suit from one of their hands. If that hand regains the lead, it will not be able to put the partner on lead to cash its tricks. Hold up is one of basic techniques in play.
An endplay, in bridge and similar games, is a tactical play where a defender is put on lead at a strategic moment, and then has to make a play that loses one or more tricks. Most commonly the losing play either constitutes a free finesse, or else it gives declarer a ruff and discard. In a case where declarer has no entries to dummy, the defender may also be endplayed into leading a suit which can be won in that hand.
The stepping-stone squeeze is an advanced type of squeeze in contract bridge. It is used when the declarer has enough high cards to take all but one of the remaining tricks, but does not have enough communication between the hands to cash them. It was analyzed and named by Terence Reese in the book "The Expert Game", also titled "Master Play in Contract Bridge".
A strip squeeze is a declarer technique at contract bridge combining elements of squeeze and endplay.
In contract bridge, the trump squeeze is a variant of the simple squeeze in which one threat is a suit that if unguarded can be established by ruffing.
Morton's fork is a coup in contract bridge that forces an opponent to choose between:
A compound squeeze is a type of play in the game of contract bridge. In this squeeze one opponent is squeezed such that some form of other squeeze emerges involving either or both players. Usually this term is used to reference a pentagonal squeeze. In this form of squeeze both players guard two suits, and one player guards a third suit. On the play of a card the player guarding three suits must give up one of the shared guards . Now each opponent singly guards one suit, and there is a third suit that is jointly guarded. This means that a double squeeze matrix exists. Note that there are pseudo compound squeezes, where the triply squeezed opponent can select the 'correct' shared suit, such that the entry situation precludes the proper functioning of the double squeeze.
A winkle squeeze is a rare squeeze/endplay in contract bridge in which a trick is offered to the defenders but whichever wins the trick is then endplayed. Often one defender would be forced to offer a finesse or ruff and discard while the other could overtake and thereby promote a trick in that suit for declarer. The winkle squeeze was named and analyzed by Terence Reese in Master Play in Contract Bridge.
The trump coup is a contract bridge coup used when the hand on lead has no trumps remaining, while the next hand in rotation has only trumps, including a high one that would have been onside for a direct finesse if a trump could have been led. The play involves forcing that hand to ruff, only to be overruffed. A similar motive is met in coup en passant, where indirect finesse is used instead of direct.
A triple squeeze is a squeeze against one player, in three suits; a more explicit definition is "three simple squeezes against the same player."
A guard squeeze is a type of squeeze in contract bridge where a player is squeezed out of a card which prevents his partner from being finessed. The squeeze operates in three suits, where the squeezed player protects the menaces in two suits, but cannot help his partner anymore in the third suit after the squeeze is executed.
Loser on loser play is a type of declarer's play in contract bridge, usually in trump contracts, where the declarer discards a loser card on an opponent's winner, instead of ruffing.
Backwash squeeze is a rare squeeze which involves squeezing an opponent which lies behind declarer's menace. A variation of this, known as the "Sydney Squeeze" or "Seres Squeeze", was discovered in play at a rubber bridge game in Sydney, Australia in 1965, by the Australian great Tim Seres; it was later attested by famous bridge theorist Géza Ottlik in an article in The Bridge World in 1974, as well as in his famous book Adventures in Card Play, co-authored with Hugh Kelsey.
A clash squeeze is a three suit bridge squeeze with a special kind of menace, referred to as clash menace. The clash menace is one that might fall under a winner in the opposite hand, because it can be covered by another card in an opponent's hand. If the clash squeeze can force the opponent to discard his guard, then the clash menace can be cashed separately from the winner opposite. For example, consider this layout of the spade suit:
An entry squeeze is a move inn contract bridge
A knockout squeeze is a squeeze in three suits, one of which is the trump suit. The defender's trump holding is needed to prevent declarer from making a successful play involving trumps, including one as prosaic as ruffing a loser. Because the knockout squeeze does not threaten to promote declarer's trumps to winners it is termed a non-material squeeze. Other non-material squeezes include entry squeezes, single-suit squeezes and winkles.