[lamford]

---

You did well to correct to 7NT, RR, gloated HH,
South, as you would not have made 7H.
Indeed any lead would have beaten you,
whereas 7NT was cold on any lead played by me.
The jack of spades was led. How do you bring this home?

[Lovera]

lamford, on 2024-December-12, 16:10, said:

---

You did well to correct to 7NT, RR, gloated HH,
South, as you would not have made 7H.
Indeed any lead would have beaten you,
whereas 7NT was cold on any lead played by me.
The jack of spades was led. How do you bring this home?

Hi all (and many wishes for Xmas). It's strange that anyone has replied to you as usually happened. Probably is involved a type of squeeze (i'm watching ♦ and ♣ for menaces) eventually progressive too.

[apollo1201]

Xmas is over! May we get the (funny) reveal as a gift? Thanks 🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄

[Lovera]

I have the idea that we have to see more in-deep and to do any sacrifice.

[Lovera]

I think I found the solution. Looking at the hand we have 10 tricks in high cards and to think of a repeated or progressive squeeze it is necessary to have another winner which can be the ♣10 if QJ are "dropped". If things are like this then W can have 3S-2H-4D-4C necessarily having to have control of ♥ in S.Therefore the ♠Q should be a winner. We also assign to W K and J in ♦. Having then seven winners between ♠ and ♥, collecting the high cards in the minors and returning to the hand at ♣ when we play the last ♥ W will be squeezed in those suits and will have to give up the 13th trick.

[smerriman]

 Lovera, on 2024-December-29, 10:50, said:

I think I found the solution. Looking at the hand we have 10 tricks in high cards and to think of a repeated or progressive squeeze it is necessary to have another winner which can be the ♣10 if QJ are "dropped". If things are like this then W can have 3S-2H-4D-4C necessarily having to have control of ♥ in S.Therefore the ♠Q should be a winner. We also assign to W K and J in ♦. Having then seven winners between ♠ and ♥, collecting the high cards in the minors and returning to the hand at ♣ when we play the last ♥ W will be squeezed in those suits and will have to give up the 13th trick.

I can't follow this at all. If West has 3244 how does the ♠Q become a winner on any other lead?

[smerriman]

OK, I got it.

Spoiler

---

East gets progressively squeezed in three suits. In hearts, you can't avoid a trump loser.

[Lovera]

smerriman, on 2024-December-30, 19:02, said:

I can't follow this at all. If West has 3244 how does the ♠Q become a winner on any other lead?

Sorry but I forgot to see your post. On all other plays the protections constituted by the relative winners come into action. All squeezes work on the player immediately after the first squeeze card which here is in ♥ while on the second defender, as we know there must be conditions to apply and which sometimes are not there. In N two discards must be made, the first in ♠ and the second in one of the minors while W must discard three times freeing up a further reachable winner.

[smerriman]

It's hard to understand your post, but if this is the hand that you're talking about:

---

then by clicking the GIB button you can see you're down on a club, heart, or high diamond lead.

I believe the solution I posted above is unique.

[Lovera]

smerriman, on 2025-January-03, 13:15, said:

It's hard to understand your post, but if this is the hand that you're talking about:

---

then by clicking the GIB button you can see you're down on a club, heart, or high diamond lead.

I believe the solution I posted above is unique.

Yes, but my mistake was descarting ♠3 . In this way the final ending on last heart works.

[smerriman]

It doesn't matter what you discard; you can't make 7NT on any of those leads.

[Lovera]

smerriman, on 2025-January-03, 13:15, said:

It's hard to understand your post, but if this is the hand that you're talking about:

---

then by clicking the GIB button you can see you're down on a club, heart, or high diamond lead.

I believe the solution I posted above is unique.

I am replying late to You to say that I remain convinced that W should be squeezed. Since 7♥ would have been bid, this should mean control of the suit (i.e. K♥ second or third in W) and I do not "see" much of the possibility of a stiff K. I am very brief to try to "compact" avoiding as much as possible to explain the movements of the cards and let's say that this "algorithmic hermeticism" if on the one hand accelerates the conclusion can be more difficult to understand. In this hand another element to keep in mind should also be the time factor to reach for the action of the squeeze card. Usually Lamford acts on balanced hands and sometimes gives indications for the solution even in the title of the topic.

[smerriman]

I'm sorry, but I can't understand a single word of that I am confident the solution I posted is unique. If you believe you have a different solution, please post your hand using the hand diagram tool, since your first one is proven incorrect by the GIB button.

[Lovera]

After thinking about W's position for some time, I had an intuition. So W should have the 5-2-2-4 with the K♥ and E - that is squeezed - the 4-3-4-2 with the K♠ maintaining the same distribution of the ♣ but in reverse for the ♦ with KJ in W. On the lead in a minor suit the ending is a criss-cross whilest with ♠ one it is an automatic. Because of how the cards are placed it could be difficult to see how to get to the ♠ ♦ ending vs E.

[smerriman]

No, that doesn't work either; the puzzle asks you to ensure 7♥ by North fails on every lead, whereas for your hand it actually makes on every lead.

---

Again, the solution I already posted is unique.

[lamford]

Indeed, the unique solution was the one smerriman posted. Clearly quite tough as none of my Facebook friends where I also posted it found the answer. And there are over 1000 of them. The backgammon players had an excuse that they did not play bridge, but the bridge players ...