Not a Matter of Making

	Q 5
	Q J 2
	A K Q 4
	A 10 8 4
10 9 6		K 7 4 3 2
5		10 8 6
J 10 8 4		7 6 5
K Q 7 6 3		J 2
	A J 8
	A K 9 7 4 3
	9 2	Opening lead: K of clubs
	9 5	Contract: 6 hearts, 6 no

Well, it wasn't a case of making the contract here. Eleven out of 27 weren't even in slam, while no one was in grand slam and no one picked up fewer than 12 tricks. But there were some serious matchpoints at issue with an overtrick. Let me give you the figures first: Six hearts plus 6: 42.31%; six no plus six: 46.15%; six hearts plus 7: 65.38%; and six no plus 7: 92.31%. There are a few surprises here and in any event the figures should carry some serious implications for the matchpoint player.

Note that the 10-point difference between 6 hts and 6 no without an overtrick is negligible. But the difference between the same contracts with an overtrick is a rather astounding 27 points! For ten points! So the overtrick in hearts means a jump of 23 points, no small jump in itself, while in no trump the jump is 46 points!

So any way you look at it, you simply cannot afford to be negligent of overtricks in matchpoint events. As for the play of the hand, yes, declarer can make 7 on his own steam. West is subject to a 3-suit squeeze in hearts, where indeed, thirteen tricks can be generated by taking the spade hook before trump are out and ruffing the third round in dummy. In no trump, East can theoretically control the second round of clubs with the jack -- though not if he leads it! That indeed was the lead for the only no trump declarer not making 7, playing from the opposite side of the table, of course. In any event, let me run through play of several declarers and their opponents.

I'll start with the one who made the contract with a third round spade ruff, which ironically he didn't need because his RHO didn't cover the Q. Opening club lead, two rounds of trump, ending in dummy, three rounds of diamonds, sluffing a club, Q of spades, which holds, low to the ace (!) and then the J is ruffed. I at first thought there had been three consecutive mistakes: East failed to cover the Q, declarer failed to continue the finesse with low to the J and then East failed to take the lead of the J with his K. Since everybody else was playing substantially a no trump line -- even with hearts trump, going with top cards -- I had overlooked that possibility and had to look a second time before seeing that the third round was ruffed.

But to the more interesting lines, starting with the declarer who got the J of clubs opening lead. He now would have had his RHO mercilessly squeezed if he hadn't fiddle-faddled around so. It's true that in no trump, he faced some serious undertricks if the spade hook didn't hold. But, hey, man, that was your choice to play in no trump and you've only got 11 winners without the spade hook and so it certainly behooves you to take that chance. Had he taken the spade hook early and presuming a cover by his LHO (remember, he's playing from the other side of the table), and then run hearts, sluffing three clubs, he would have wound up after 9 tricks with two diamonds, the 9 of clubs and the 8 of spades in his dummy, opposite A K Q 3 of diamonds, while his left-hand opponent would have to keep four diamonds, the 10 of spades and the Q of clubs -- which is kinda hard if you're restricted to four cards. So actually, he'd been squeezed a trick earlier. At trick 8 he would have had to give up a control in one of those suits. Which is pretty much to say that one wouldn't have had to be a squeeze expert or exceptionally observant to pick up a 13th trick (and 46 matchpoints). Just don't cash the diamonds early and destroy your communication! And you'll almost willy-nilly fall into that squeeze.

But here's what declarer did: win the opening lead and run six heart tricks. Oh, I have told you a zillion times, don't think you're solving much running your powerful suit when you still have housekeeping to do. Actually, this declarer hadn't queered his chances yet, since he'd rightly sluffed three clubs from his closesd hand, and he had two entries in diamonds and so could use one to take the spade hook and establish his squeeze. So after he'd sluffed his clubs and took a lead to the diamonds, he led . . . the 5 of spades! Finessing the J. So he doesn't transfer control of spades to the opponent with the diamonds and the clubs. He lets his LHO control the third round of the suit.

But wait! I said that opponent was squeezed in three suits. Take one away and isn't he squeezed in two suits? Right you are. If declarer had only cashed his A of spades at that point, that would have been trick 10 after which his RHO has to save three diamonds (the suit had been led once) and the Q of clubs. Which is a no can do.

Of course our fiddle-faddling declarer didn't do any such thing. He went back to his diamonds, led the Q of spades, not covered, taken with the A and the final trick is a spade to the king. Please note that defender's astute non-cover. A cover hands declarer his overtrick. But declarer must either gobble up his own queen or let the queen hold and lose the last trick to the J of diamods. West's partner (on that hand) had long ago sluffed all his spades. Whether West was an astute card counter or just made a fine guess, he saved a bunch of matchpoints.

Well, I'll try to be briefer with a few more declarers. The rest are in hearts: K of clubs opening lead, three heart leads, West sluffing a club and a spade. So early? By trick 4 he'd taken his spade holding out of contention? Actually, West was only following the precept of keeping the same number as dummy, and indeed while contemplating why West couldn't have held off a little on that spade discard, I saw a different squeeze on him, etowit:

Opening lead a club, cash three diamonds, sluffing a club, ruff a club, heart to the Q, ruff a club, cash the A of hearts and a heart to the J. At that point, there have been 9 tricks, three leads in each of the lower three suits. Dummy is showing a diamond, the 10 of clubs and Q 5 of spades, and West needing a diamond and the Q of clubs can hold only two spades. So I guess one can't be too hard on that West for that early discard, for he'd run into difficulty later if declarer played for a squeeze. Still, declarers aren't all that alert to squeeze possibilities. This declarer pounced on three diamond leads after three hearts and now has no entry to dummy and no squeeze. Had West just discarded one more club, yes, bringing himself down to two clubs where dummy is showing three, balancing the possibility that the twice-guarded 10 of spades against wanting to keep the same number of clubs as dummy, he would have inhibited the overtrick.

Declarer can't sluff a club without cashing three diamonds and at that point he has no re-entry to dummy and clubs become disposable. As it happened, declarer did cash three diamonds after the third round of trump, led the Q of spades, and by trick 10 was cashing the 8 of spades for his overtrick. West, incidentally, sluffed the ten of spades at trick 4, then followed with the 9 to the lead of the Q and cover by partner, finally playing the 6 when declarer played the J. It made no difference as long as he parted with his third spade, but why the 10 and then the 9? Was he trying to tell his partner something? I have no idea.

Here's another trick four spade discard, only this defender at least tossed the 6. It wasn't until trick 13 that declarer's 8 of spades won the overtrick, almost as if declarer had no idea of what was high but had to play something. And another, same thing. Fourth trick sluff of 6, 13th trick cashing of 8 of spades. I had to look to see if these were two different declarer, and they were.

Here's the 10 of spades lead. No more errors. Covered by the Q, then K, taken by the A, J of spades cashed, the 8 ruffed. Hadn't noticed that one before. Another: K of clubs opening lead, heart lead, a second heart lead and third-trick discard of a spade? He had one more club than dummy and couldn't spade a club? His first opportunity to sluff? And one last defensive error: Club opening lead, four rounds of trump, three rounds of diamonds, Q of spades holding ! ! ! Declarer now finesses the J. You might note that declarer had already cashed his diamonds and thus had no squeeze. But, alas, . . I just noticed that non-coverer's partner had sluffed a spade at trick 4, like a few others, so it didn't really matter. Still . . .

What are the lessons? Well, I would say for defenders, the principal lesson is not to play squeezed until you really have a difficulty. A twice-guarded 10 can be a valuable card when three honors go on the same trick, as in the cover of a queen. When faced with a difficult decision, you simply have to weigh this against that. If declarer has no entry to dummy, then keeping the same number as dummy is pointless. Of course West can be squeezed. But would he have been? A significant number of declarers cashed out their diamonds before showing any inkling of a squeeze.

As for declarers, the main lesson is to take the necessary risk (here the spade finesse) and don't cash out an entry to dummy before you have to. Any average declarer who followed those simple precepts would have fallen into a squeeze he didn't know he had.

And for both sides of the table the unambiguous lesson is that an overtrick can mean as big a difference as that between making a contract and going down. And that's a lot.