Solution to the Hand of the Month
Í 632
Ì KQ102
Ë AK432
Ê 4
Í Q87 Í J954
Ì 86 Ì 9543
Ë 108763 Ë 9
Ê K63 Ê QJ105
Í AK10
Ì AJ7
Ë QJ
Ê A9872
The answer to the basic play-or-defend question should be ... “It depends.” The reason is, if South is the declarer (as in the diagram above), you should declare. If instead North is declaring, you should defend, because if East is on lead the hand can be beaten.
Í 6
Ì K
Ë K2
Ê —-
Í Q Í J9
Ì — Ì 9
Ë 108
Ë —
Ê K Ê Q
Í K10
Ì —
Ë —
Ê 98
This hand is a classic example of a compound squeeze, and even without the help of Deep Finesse Oakley was able to come up with the basic answer: on any non- spade lead, declarer ducks a club trick. Now the ÊA and exactly ONE high spade is cashed, and the red suit winners cashed. The 4-card end position becomes as shown in the previous column:
North cashes the heart, East follows, South pitches a club, and West is pinched in three suits. He can’t pitch a diamond, obviously, and the pitch of ÍQ would let North finesse against the jack for the 12th trick, so West must pitch a club. Now the ËK executes a simple black-suit squeeze against East.
If West attacks at trick 1 with a spade lead, there is no need for a squeeze. Leading the ÍQ sets up an immediate finesse position, and the lead of a low spade up to South’s hand takes East’s jack out of the equation. Now declarer just cashes the ÊA and all his red-suit winners, and poor West is thrown in with the fifth diamond, forced to lead away from his ÍQ in an endplay at trick 12.
But a low spade lead is the killer if North is the declarer. He has to win the first trick or he has no threat. So when the club is ducked, the defense just leads another spade and the slam is impossible.
As Oakley said when he sent me his analysis, “Two spade leads equals no late entry to South; no entry equals no squeeze!”
But admit it: if you’re a human being on lead against 6NT, wouldn’t you be just a wee bit tempted to lead the ÊQ?