[biggerclub]

http://tinyurl.com/kbpsvc7

So when I get down toward the end, it's fairly obvious that W is guarding both ♠s and ♦s but the ♠s guard is somewhat subtle. If W throws a ♠ at trick 11, I cash the remaining two top ♠s in dummy. As he actually threw the Q♦, I played the 8♠ to the 10♠ in my hand and cashed the J♦.

---

I thought this was what Reese calls a winkle, but after a bit of resesarch, I see that's not it (the winkle involves a throw in, not just pressuring an opponent). So I'm not sure what it is called, but it sure was fun to see it coming at trick 4 or so and then run it out.

It is also odd in that the squeeze card is in the hand with the two trick threat.

Anyway, I can do it, I just don't know how to name it when I brag about it! Any suggestions?

[nige1]

Well done, biggerclub!
A pretty and unusual squeeze!
An automatic squeeze in a blocked position.
A kind of one-suit criss-cross squeeze.
I think George Coffin published a similar ending in one of his early books.
Simplified ending on left.
South to lead at notrumps.

---

Here is a variation
Without the count.
At notrumps,
South to lead
and make 3/4.

---

[EricK]

I think this is what Chien-Hwa Wang calls a nosittej squeeze in 'The Squeeze at Bridge', but I don't have my copy to hand. The name, if you are wondering, is the reverse of Jettison. The point being that the situation is similar to that of a jettison squeeze, but there's no actual need to jettison the singleton honour.

I have two points to make: I don't recall seeing the name elsewhere so this probably isn't standard; and I am doing this from memory so might be completely wrong about what a Nosittej Squeeze is!

[biggerclub]

nige1, on 2015-January-04, 15:51, said:

Well done, biggerclub!
A pretty and unusual squeeze!
An automatic squeeze in a blocked position.
A kind of one-suit criss-cross squeeze.
I think George Coffin published a similar ending in one of his early books.
Simplified ending on left.
South to lead at notrumps.

---

Here is a variation
Without the count.
At notrumps,
South to lead
and make 3/4.

---

I get the first example, although my case was "funner" because of the dual entry situation in ♠s.

I am not sure that the second one illustrates the same principal. On the A♠, E is forced to dump the A♥, else declarer scores 3 tricks in the minors. Once that happens, the A♦ becomes a stepping stone back to the A♣.

I do like your description of "Criss-Cross in a Single Suit." I think that is most apt and describes exactly what is going on. Although not in a typical, two-suited, criss-cross sort of way.

[nige1]

biggerclub, on 2015-January-04, 18:49, said:

I get the first example, although my case was "funner" because of the dual entry situation in ♠s.

I am not sure that the second one illustrates the same principal. On the A♠, E is forced to dump the A♥, else declarer scores 3 tricks in the minors. Once that happens, the A♦ becomes a stepping stone back to the A♣.

I do like your description of "Criss-Cross in a Single Suit." I think that is most apt and describes exactly what is going on. Although not in a typical, two-suited, criss-cross sort of way.

Another good candidate name
is Erick's "Nossitej".

In the triple-squeeze variation,
there's no "stepping-stone".
The modified version on the left
makes this clear.

At notrumps,
South to lead
and make at least 3/4.

---

[Lovera]

EricK, on 2015-January-04, 17:23, said:

I think this is what Chien-Hwa Wang calls a nosittej squeeze in 'The Squeeze at Bridge', but I don't have my copy to hand. The name, if you are wondering, is the reverse of Jettison. The point being that the situation is similar to that of a jettison squeeze, but there's no actual need to jettison the singleton honour.

I have two points to make: I don't recall seeing the name elsewhere so this probably isn't standard; and I am doing this from memory so might be completely wrong about what a Nosittej Squeeze is!

(13) North ♠ A ♥ J ♦ - ♣ - East not infl. South ♠ KJ ♥ - ♦ - ♣ 9 West ♠ Q10 ♥ A ♦ - ♣ - South leads the nine of clubs and West is squeezed. If West discards the ace of hearts , North lets go of nine of diamonds, and North's ace of spades and jack of hearts win the last two tricks. If West discards a spade, North jettison the ace of spades, and South king-jack of spade makes two tricks. This positional simple squeeze is called a jettison squeeze. Now, let us swap North's ace and South's king of spade [..with the same diagram].. This squeeze is the natural reverse of the jettison squeeze. We may call it a "nosittej squeeze". Moreover, this nosittej squeeze is automatic: If the East and West hands are interchanged, East will be squeezed. (From "The SQUEEZE at Bridge by Chien-Hwa Wang pagg. 38 and 39) (Note: The situation in diagrams (13) and (14) were first published in "The British Bridge World, December 1956).(Lovera)

[Lovera]

The nosittej is also known as entry squeeze : it serves to solve comucation problems. Terence Reese analyzed these endings togheter winkle and steppingstone : W ♠ - ♥ Qx ♦ - ♣ AQ in N ♠ x ♥ AJ ♦ - ♣ x in E ♠ - ♥ - ♦ xx ♣ xx in S ♠ A ♥ K ♦ - ♣ Kx (stepp. sq.), bye.

[biggerclub]

Entry squeeze is terminology that I have heard (I learned squeeze technique mostly from Reese, although I have read Love's treatise at least once). But I am not sure it applies here. I thought it applied when the defender was squeezed out of the Master Card in a suit, allowing declarer to enter the opposite hand and take a stranded winner.

I like Nige1's "one suited criss-cross" although I am not sure that even my friend Danny Kleinman would understand what I was talking about if I tried to describe this to the gang at Barrington Bridge Club.

[Lovera]

The nosittej (and/or also entry) squeeze should came from twin entry squeeze (Axx/Kx) minus a card in suit that is to say Ax/K and is a 0-loser squeeze acting at 11th trick.