[Gweny]

Hi Friends,

Minutes of 14 February Meeting is now post on website.

BIG thanks to Frosty for compiling minutes for us!

14 February Minutes

[spwdo]

hi,


once again great job , sondra, jan and gweny. i feel we making progress in tring to make bbo an even better place as it is already:D






thx marc

[McBruce]

It sounds like these meetings and the Directors web site are helping improve tourneys on BBO. I wish I could have been there.

A quibble:

"Regarding psych bids, it was suggested that 1) only one psych bid be excused/allowed per tournament, 2) that the player be warned and 3) that notes be added to the player’s profile."

If somebody wants to run a tourney without psyches or with limited psyches, it seems to me they have three problems.

The first is that according to the Laws of Duplicate Bridge this is not bridge! You may as well run a tournament where the rules are that all one-bids are immediately claimed, or passed out hands are redealt. Psychic bids, as long as they are not regularly fielded, are part of the game. They are legal. Attempting to control them over the course of a session is silly. I make a bona fide psychic bid perhaps once every three sessions. But if the correct hand came up three times in a round, I might psyche three times in a round. Don't forget, this is a legal tactic. Imagine what would happen if a Director came up to you and said "you can't open 1NT any more this session, you've done it twice already."

Second, a definition of a psychic bid is rather difficult. People who hate psyches have very different views of what consistutes a psyche than those who use them occasionally. The ACBL rule is that a psychic bid is one which grossly distorts the high-card strength or the distribution of the hand. But to some people, opening 1NT on a good 14 count, or a flawed 18 count, is a dirty rotten psyche (but strangely, only when it works--there is never a complaint when the opponents miss a game or get too high).

Third, since psyching is a legal tactic, I would suggest that you need to advertise that you won't allow, or you limit psyching in your tourney. Only if you make certain that everyone knows can you reasonably take the step of warning players, or keeping a list of psychic bidders. Don't get me wrong here. If a player makes outrageous psyches every second hand, or a partnership psyches often and never gets in trouble, this is good reason to list them. But a player who psyches ocassionally should not get listed.

If we really want to list someone, let's start listing the people who complain about anything and everything. Psyching occasionally (which may rarely include consecutive deals) is legal. Harrassing the Director is not.

[Gweny]

Problem is certain people do this on regular basis and not with discipline you mention.

We all agree this is legitimate (and fun) part of bridge but chronic psychs is entire other issue.

This is why we encourage people to use notes feature.

[spwdo]

hi,


and furhter more about psychics, i believe when p knows what it going on its illegal so using it several time in tourney and it slowly or fast enters a agreement, we agreed that the correct explanation if ask by opps is" no agreement with partner" only good explantion my idea because p dodnt know what is going on(if he does its illegal) and i like to be reported of spychic bids from whoever is doing it so i can keep track:) but we had this discussion else where on a topic called psychic bids. for the record , im not supporting this only once a tourney idea cause like some suggested here when there is no agreement with p on this its and stays free to use in my tourneys



greetings marc

[inquiry]

Let me know which tournements limit you to one psyche per session... so I can aovid it... Saying this, i have not psyced in my four tournments even once, but like McBruce, when i get the hand, I am going to psyche...

As a side note, keeping track of them is fine with me and having some sort of sanctions against too frequent use is ok too...but then you come to what is too frequent... who can decide? Not me.

Ben

[Frosty]

AHhhhhhhhhh - to psych or not to psych, this is the question

This is a subject that might attract quite a bit more interest and input if it were not hidden here as part of the meeting minutes topic. Anyone want to open a new topic?

Frosty

[etherwiz]

I hope this goes here.

The Scheldual and the TD's Board is Excellent !
Gwen (I think is is her work) should really be congradualated!

It is ecellent. Perhaps allowing a text file - Like Condition of Contest would help , but the work is, as Tony the Tiger once said, GREAT.

_*_Dave

[hrothgar]

inquiry, on Feb 17 2004, 01:34 AM, said:

Let me know which tournements limit you to one psyche per session... so I can avoid it... Saying this, i have not psyced in my four tournments even once, but like McBruce, when i get the hand, I am going to psyche...

I agree completely with Ben and McBruce.

From my own perspective, tournament directors should have the option to run tournaments that restrict "psyches". At the same time they have an ethical obligation to clearly and specifically note this decision in the conditions of contest, since whatever card game that they're playing sure as hell isn't bridge.

Unfortunately, this "issue" is a highly contentious one, made worse so by idiocy like the Oakley letter.

[luis]

I think that psyches may be classified and recorded to eventually disclose an implicit agreement that can be illegal even when the players involved don't know that what they know is an illegal agreement.

First of all there're "obvious" psyches. Like opening bids in 3rd position NV vrs Vul, and bids NV after 1x-dbl, etc etc etc. I think that psyches that are made in such positions are likely going to be suspected by both the player's pd and the opponents so they are not really a problem. For example after 1m-dbl-1M most pairs play that a double is for penalties to prevent the classic psyche.
Definition: "An obvious psyche is one done in a position where a psyche is likely to be expected by your opponents"

Other psyches maybe classfied as "smart" psyches and are dangerous if the become an agreement, for example a fake cuebid without a control in the suit being cuebid may lead to a very good result since inocent oponents will lead something else, if your pd is aware of this habit you may have an unfair advantage. Another example is bidding a weak 2 on a void with a 8/9 card suit elsewhere, if you remove a double to a new suit is obvious you psyched so normally you will be safe and your opponents may run into trouble never finding their fit.
Definition: "A smart psyche is one that is likely to produce damage in your opponents while your side is fairly safe"

Finally there're "random" psyches, random psyches are things like opening 1x on a void or doing things that are very likely to result in a very bad result for your side and/or your opponents.

In my opinion, that can be very wrong a parntership with 10 recorded "obvious" psyches is less suspect than a partnership with 2 of the "smart" psyches. So there must be some careful analysis before pointing fingers.

Maybe the best way to regulate this delicate topic is to define an acceptable percentage of psyches by type per board and then issue warnings or finally sanctions to pairs that are above the limits.

[McBruce]

Gweny: wonderful job with the new tourney schedule page. Forgive me for stealing the thread on a side issue...


luis wrote:

Other psyches maybe classfied as "smart" psyches and are dangerous if the become an agreement, for example a fake cuebid without a control in the suit being cuebid may lead to a very good result since inocent oponents will lead something else, if your pd is aware of this habit you may have an unfair advantage. Another example is bidding a weak 2 on a void with a 8/9 card suit elsewhere, if you remove a double to a new suit is obvious you psyched so normally you will be safe and your opponents may run into trouble never finding their fit.
Definition: "A smart psyche is one that is likely to produce damage in your opponents while your side is fairly safe"

Finally there're "random" psyches, random psyches are things like opening 1x on a void or doing things that are very likely to result in a very bad result for your side and/or your opponents.

In my opinion, that can be very wrong a parntership with 10 recorded "obvious" psyches is less suspect than a partnership with 2 of the "smart" psyches. So there must be some careful analysis before pointing fingers.

Well written! The main problem with recording psyches is that the very people who desperately want them recorded are, I suspect, the ones least likely to do the proper work in classifying and analyzing.

The smart psyches above are close to what the ACBL calls risk-free psyches. To use your examples:

1) If you open 2♥ on 9-0-1-3 and it goes 2♥ - DBL - P - P - 2♠ - P - ? your partner with equal or better hearts should never pass. If he passes when he should correct, this is clear evidence that you have an agreement about this particular psyche, and this is illegal (at least in the ACBL).

2) The fake cuebid is so old that even Shieinwold mentioned it nearly 50 years ago in "Five Weeks To Winning Bridge" (Chapter 7)! But again, if partner has controls in the other suits and enough power to bid slam but signs off, this is evidence that the fake cuebid is risk-free by agreement.

Even in my tournaments, which are sayc-only individuals, I warn people that non-sayc bids are legal until partner fields them. If the auction goes 1NT - P - 2♥* - P - P, there is no infraction, unless the transfer bidder has less than five spades. In this case the pass by the 1NT opener fields the non-sayc bid. This is the standard we should be using. I doubt that the anti-psyche folks will go anywhere near this far.

Maybe (far down the road, there are lots of other priorities) we can have a "report a psyche" button. Click the button, point to the wacky bid, add comments if you like, send the whole thing to a database. (I'm NOT volunteering to go through the data, by the way. ) We might uncover some psyche-maniacs. But my guess is that we would instead uncover people who complain far too often.

[inquiry]

There is another issue in online tournements not mentioned... which is the inadvertent misclick when undo's are either not allowed (most tourneys) or the opponents do not allow you to correct the bid. I suspect misclicks happen at a fairly high rate. I myself misclicked when partner made a splinter bid in my doubleton and while going to signoff in 4 of our major fit, pass showed up on my screen.. I hit "undo". My opponent kindly told me it was too late to undo and holding his seven card diamond suit found the careful pass.

Needless to say I got a horrible result on this board, also needless to say, this would not be reported as a psyche... but, other misclicks do and can occur as well, and no doubt they might look pretty bizarre....

Ben

[etherwiz]

I would like to clarify the Earlier Post I made here.

I was congradulating Gwen on her work for the Tournament Schedual BOARD.

That ment the Web Page that displays the Times/Days of the BBO Tournaments, and alows a second page to better define the Tournaments. I suggested adding a text area the the TD could fill in with more details that are not on the Flags in the BBO Tournaments (i.e. additional info then (not) Undo's, Timed or not) but the details display is a very good, consistant job.

There was no reference to any thing other then the display of the schedual and maybe the whole TD Courner idea.

In no way can I think of anything I said that "flaming", and I have re-read it 14 times. For petes sake it was 5 sentances that were meant to express graditute and thankfulness for the Hard Work that was obviously done.

How anyone could say these 5 sentences are inflamatory baffels me.

_*_Dave

[Trpltrbl]

It's a good thing I can keep up with the meetings through this, so I know what is going on. I am trying to attend meetings but I am always interfered with work. I will try to be there when I can.

Mike

[Azzkikr]

I would like to express my appreciation for the minutes of the meetings, it is very informative and allows you to keep upto date with whats on the TD's mind. it is a great follow up to the forums. Thank you for all the effort that has been going into all the information.

sorry to be fussy, was wondering if for the next meeting you might be able to just give a time its on for a certain country, I have a bust schedule (as im sure alot of you do) and when i log onto BBO my brain isnt usually functioning when i first log on, as BBO is my downtime to catch up with people. - lame excuse i know.