This article is ratedStart-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

Contract bridgeLow‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Contract bridge, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofContract bridge on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Contract bridgeWikipedia:WikiProject Contract bridgeTemplate:WikiProject Contract bridgeContract bridge Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale.

The Double Guard Squeeze is not so rare (although the layout of the specific example given is indeed a rarity).

Is this really a Double Guard Squeeze or something a little more exotic ?It appears to be a sort of mirror hybrid !

My understanding is that The Double Guard Squeeze is very closely related to the Compound Squeeze.

Assume that all the conditions for a compound squeeze are present except that one of the two ambiguous threats has no entry. As the opponents will discard to ensure that the entry-less ambiguous threat will end up as the common threat for the ensuing double squeeze then, by definition, this compound squeeze must fail.

In these cases, the Double Guard Squeeze can come to the rescue.

Its basic form consists of a simple guard squeeze on one opponent followed by a simple squeeze (or successful finesse )against the other opponent. The need to guard against the finesse turns out to be ample compensation for the lack of an entry to the common threat.

Would it help to provide some different examples of these ?

Tjlillie22:27, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I finally recognise this rarity as an example of the hexagon squeeze!!—Precedingunsigned comment added by82.23.112.59 (talk)21:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Start-Class Contract bridge articles
• Low-importance Contract bridge articles