[SimonFa]

Someone on another thread said that triple squeezes only appear in bridge books so I thought you might be interested in this had, again from last nights BGB Summer Summer Simultaneous Pairs (http://www.simpairs....&session=005668)

---

According to the accompanying booklet all roads lead to 450 with 3NT as an outlier and 460 can be made on 6♥lead, which I received but didn't time the play well.

I've set up the first few tricks to show the way.

Yes I know partners bidding left a lot to be desired.

Edit: Lead corrected to 6♥

[VM1973]

What lead? ♥J?

[SimonFa]

VM1973, on 2011-July-26, 06:55, said:

What lead? ♥J?

Sry, 6♥

[wyman]

South could duck the first club, but cute hand.

[semeai]

Nice hand.

wyman, on 2011-July-26, 08:47, said:

South could duck the first club, but cute hand.

Then you get 3 natural club tricks and still make 5.

[wyman]

semeai, on 2011-July-26, 09:07, said:

Then you get 3 natural club tricks and still make 5.

Ah, yes. [I thought you could make 6 as played, but you can't as W has to pitch before N.]

[ArtK78]

Many years ago, while I was still in college, four of us were playing and my opponent ducked one trick too many in a notrump game that I was declaring. I then proceeded to make the hand by a triple squeeze. I don't remember the details.

As Clyde Love points out in his book on squeeze play, the nice thing about triple squeezes is that the victim is squeezed one trick before you need them to be squeezed.

I have not experienced a true triple squeeze since then (and that was about 35 years ago).

I note that your triple squeeze is sort of a triple squeeze without the count. You have all but two of the remaining tricks. As a result of the squeeze, you gain a trick but still lose one. So, in a sense, the squeeze does operate a trick early in that you still have a loser.

[Fluffy]

this kind of "triple squeeze" where you strip an opponent off his winners and then endplay him is more common than you think

[ArtK78]

Fluffy, on 2011-July-27, 06:11, said:

this kind of "triple squeeze" where you strip an opponent off his winners and then endplay him is more common than you think

That type of "triple squeeze" is typically referred to as a strip squeeze (sometimes as a "strip squeeze and throw-in"), and it is quite common.

The rare type of triple squeeze, the one I pulled off in college, is where the opp actually has guards in three suits.

[Free]

A few years ago I made 3NT+3 with 2 Aces outside using a true triple squeeze (without endplay). I posted it on my blog. Lefty was indeed squeezed one trick 'too early'.

The strip squeezes are a lot more common like Fluffy says.

[FrancesHinden]

The squeezes where one opponent is squeezed in three suits are actually pretty common, it's just you very rarely play for them, because the odds favour the guards being split, so you generally play for a finesse, or an endplay, or a break or something.
The progressive triple squeeze - where you have a genuine gain of two tricks - is very rare. I've seen one successful one at the table. There are triple squeezes which gain more than two tricks, but I've only ever seen them in books.

A classical 'strip squeeze' is not related to a triple squeeze: there are usually only two suits involved. Typically an opponent either has to bare an honour, or he has to discard a length winner in a suit.
Some forms of strip squeeze do involve 3 suits, either with genuine trick menaces, or where an opponent has to discard his exit card in an 'idle' suit. They are also reasonably common.

[manudude03]

I had a triple squeeze (without throwin) come up last night playing in the robot rebate tourney:

---

It's a bit of a shame West didn't have the ♥J too . Then even throwing the ♦Q at trick 7 wouldn't help.

[Free]

manudude03, on 2011-September-07, 06:47, said:

I had a triple squeeze (without throwin) come up last night playing in the robot rebate tourney:

---

It's a bit of a shame West didn't have the ♥J too . Then even throwing the ♦Q at trick 7 wouldn't help.

That's actually a progressive squeeze which West didn't defend well against. I think discarding the ♦ instead of the ♠ would give you only +2.

[manudude03]

Free, on 2011-September-07, 07:12, said:

That's actually a progressive squeeze which West didn't defend well against. I think discarding the ♦ instead of the ♠ would give you only +2.

Yeah, true, hence why I said it's a shame West didn't have the ♥J too, then ditching the diamond leads to West being squeezed in the majors.

[Phil]

This was a similar position to a hand I posted last year.

Its important to understand why LHO needs to unguard the suit to his left.

[inquiry]

Real life triple squeeze do crop up, way more often than once every 35 years. Often they are simply not noticed, perhaps because you played in the wrong (or unlucky) contract. Here is a slam hand from a recent bbo online game where the good slam (6S) is doomed to fail due to the 5=0 trump split. But 6NT comes home on an interesting, and from the bidding, marked triple squeeze (well you do need West to have 6 or more diamonds, but given he opens the hand, that is close to a given).

================

IMP 					Dlr: South 
Board 7 	S KQ93  	Vul: Both
        	H AKT9  	
        	D AK4          	
S   		C 73    	S T8764 	
H QJ64 	      		 	H 832   	
D QJ8632                	D 97    	
C KQT   	S AJ52  	C 854   	
        	H 75    	
        	D T5    	
        	C AJ962 	

South  	West   	North  	East   	
1D  	Dbl    	Pass   	2C 		
2D  	3NT    	Pass   	6NT 
end

  # Contr   Ld  Tr  Score   Pts
  1 6S	E DQ  10  -200 -11.27    	
  2 6SX   E CK  11  -200 -11.27    	
  3 6N	W S6  11  -100 -10.00    	
  4 4S	E CQ   9  -100 -10.00    	
  5 3N	W D7   9   600   0.87    	
  6 4S	E CK  10   620   1.60    	
  7 4S	E DQ  10   620   1.60    	
  8 4S	E CK  10   620   1.60    	
  9 4S	E CK  10   620   1.60    	
 10 4S	E DQ  10   620   1.60    	
 11 4S	E CK  11   650   2.40    	
 12 3N	W D9  11   660   2.47    	
 13 3N	W S6  11   660   2.47    	
 14 3N	W D9  11   660   2.47    	
 15 5DX   S SK   7  1100  10.40    	
 16 4DX   S S9   5  1400  13.47 

=================

Dummy is a disappointment after the diamond nine opening lead, but you play West for all the HCP and double hook in hearts. Be careful with your entries as you have three losers, not two, but the triple squeeze crushes west anyway. It is a fun exercise try it out.

[VM1973]

I'm not sure what the difference is between a triple squeeze and a progressive squeeze.

This has been another controversial, out of nowhere, trolling response made solely for the purpose of getting a rise out of you.

[BunnyGo]

VM1973, on 2011-September-07, 17:23, said:

I'm not sure what the difference is between a triple squeeze and a progressive squeeze.

This has been another controversial, out of nowhere, trolling response made solely for the purpose of getting a rise out of you.

A triple squeeze is a squeeze in three suits that gets you a trick {sometimes more}, a progressive squeeze is a triple squeeze that when you cash your new trick squeezes the victim again for another trick.

[FrancesHinden]

Progressive triple squeezes are very rare.