[luke warm]

cardsharp, on Oct 2 2004, 05:39 PM, said:

~snip~
In this case I agree with Ben that West has fielding the psyche, that is he has taken an action (2♠, no final double) that allows for a very weak 1NT bid from partner.

well i obviously disagree, but maybe we're simply discussing semantics... i believe it's possible that at some point wayne became suspicious that the 1nt opening wasn't what he expected... now, if that happened is he bound to bid (including doubling 3nt) as if he *isn't* suspicious? i don't think so

let's say that after he bid 3s, and his rho bid 3nt, a light bulb went off and he's thinking "whoa nellie, my pard must have opened light over there"... is this "fielding" the psych? i say no...

to me fielding a psych is to bid in a way contrary to your stated agreements, because you have seen such and such a bid in such and such a situation from this partner before... imagine wayne's rho had passed instead of x'ing... also suppose that wayne's hand, in their methods, is worth an invitational bid (whatever it would be for them)... yet, because his pard opened 1nt in 3rd seat, he signed off ... that would show an awareness of pard's tendencies and would be wrong

when he passed 3nt instead of doubling, why should he alert his bid and say "i'm passing because it appears to me that partner may have psyched?"

i've told this story before, but the first time i played with richard, he psyched a 3rd seat 1nt opening... fine, nothing at all wrong with that... no harm, no foul... the 2nd time we played, there came a point when he again opened 1nt in 3rd seat... i pm'd both ops and said "he has psyched in this situation before"... was i correct to do this? i bid as if the 1nt was real, of course (happened to be a pass, but that's just the way it goes)

[keylime]

Wayne,

I can't fathom someone saying a psyche was fielded. Just another case of someone not knowing the rules. Speaks volumes on the fact that an open book exam just isn't cutting it for cont. bridge education.

[Cascade]

keylime, on Oct 3 2004, 03:42 PM, said:

Wayne,

I can't fathom someone saying a psyche was fielded. Just another case of someone not knowing the rules. Speaks volumes on the fact that an open book exam just isn't cutting it for cont. bridge education.

The director didn't say that the psyche was fielded.

The director only said that this psyche was disallowed.

[Cascade]

luke warm, on Oct 3 2004, 01:16 PM, said:

well i obviously disagree, but maybe we're simply discussing semantics... i believe it's possible that at some point wayne became suspicious that the 1nt opening wasn't what he expected... now, if that happened is he bound to bid (including doubling 3nt) as if he *isn't* suspicious? i don't think so

I made the psychic bid. My partner was responding to my 1NT opening.

[xx1943]

luke warm, on Oct 3 2004, 03:16 AM, said:

i believe it's possible that at some point wayne became suspicious that the 1nt opening wasn't what he expected... now, if that happened is he bound to bid (including doubling 3nt) as if he *isn't* suspicious? i don't think so

Hi all

I agree 100%.
Everone, who has ears to hear, knows there is something suspicous. Because I never heared about a board with about 50 HCP
opener 10; RHO 16+ for his double and later 3 ♦, me 10 and LHO 12+ or a long very good suit.
Now there are 2 possibilities.
1) opponents are crazy.
2) partner psyched
Being polite I assume the second. There is not a whiff of UI here.

Btw. My own psychics tend to occur rarer aand rarer, because I learned in bitter lessons, that on long run "crime" doesn't pay. In the early 60ties I admired great Bob Slavenburg and tried to make psychics like he did. But even when more than 50% of the psychics are successful, the graetest disadvantage of psychics is that they ruin the partnership's faith.

Cheers

Al

[EricK]

xx1943, on Oct 3 2004, 06:44 AM, said:

luke warm, on Oct 3 2004, 03:16 AM, said:

i believe it's possible that at some point wayne became suspicious that the 1nt opening wasn't what he expected... now, if that happened is he bound to bid (including doubling 3nt) as if he *isn't* suspicious? i don't think so

Hi all

I agree 100%.
Everone, who has ears to hear, knows there is something suspicous. Because I never heared about a board with about 50 HCP
opener 10; RHO 16+ for his double and later 3 ♦, me 10 and LHO 12+ or a long very good suit.
Now there are 2 possibilities.
1) opponents are crazy.
2) partner psyched
Being polite I assume the second. There is not a whiff of UI here.

Btw. My own psychics tend to occur rarer aand rarer, because I learned in bitter lessons, that on long run "crime" doesn't pay. In the early 60ties I admired great Bob Slavenburg and tried to make psychics like he did. But even when more than 50% of the psychics are successful, the graetest disadvantage of psychics is that they ruin the partnership's faith.

Cheers

Al

I disagree with some of your numbers.

After a third hand mini NT, you don't need that much to double, as you know the points are evenly divided between the two sides.

♠xx ♥xxx ♦KQJxxx ♣Ax is easily enough to be confident about beating 1NT. And after 2♠ is passed round, 3♦ seems OK too.

Also, North can't have 12+ as he passed originally, nor can he have a good long suit as he would have bid it to begin with or bid over 2♠. From West's point of view, North could have been hoping that South's ♦ were solid, and they could run 9 tricks.

Eric

[jtfanclub]

xx1943, on Oct 3 2004, 01:44 AM, said:

I agree 100%.
Everone, who has ears to hear, knows there is something suspicous.

What's suspicious is that, with a hand so strong most people would open it, responder ran. If you're not going to make a strong bid over 1NTX with that monster (either pass or XX, whichever is not the runout), when would you?

This isn't really a psyche, any more than opening a 0 count 7-heart hand 2♥ is a psyche. It's a pre-empt, one explained to the opponents as a 10-12 NT but it's clear to me that his partner doesn't believe that, or he'd be looking forward to either playing 1NTX (or XX) or playing doubled defense. The opponents have fewer than half the points, and if they're down one doubled that's a top for you with the vulnerability what it is. Why are you running, unless you're afraid your partner has psyched and won't have a place to run?

Now, does that mean partner thought opener had 3? Of course not. More likely, partner thought opener had 8-9. But it's illegal in GCC to have an agreement that in any position a 1NT opener can have fewer than 10 hcp. And that appears to have been exactly what happened.

[Cascade]

jtfanclub, on Oct 3 2004, 08:14 PM, said:

This isn't really a psyche, any more than opening a 0 count 7-heart hand 2♥ is a psyche.

The you do not understand the definition of a psychic call. A psychic bid is a deliberate, gross mistatement of either honour strength or suit length.

On this hand I chose to grossly mistate my honour strength. That is a psyche. And my right to do that is protected by the laws.

Quote

Now, does that mean partner thought opener had 3?  Of course not.  More likely, partner thought opener had 8-9.  But it's illegal in GCC to have an agreement that in any position a 1NT opener can have fewer than 10 hcp.  And that appears to have been exactly what happened.

I simply cannot follow this logic. Not to mention that it is not illegal to open 1NT with fewer than 10 hcp. What is illegal is to play conventions after a NT that has a lower limit.

"7. CONVENTIONAL RESPONSES, REBIDS AND A CONVENTIONAL
DEFENSE TO AN OPPONENT’S CONVENTIONAL DEFENSE
after natural notrump opening bids or overcalls with a lower limit of
fewer than 10 HCP or with a range of greater than 5 HCP (including
those that have two non-consecutive ranges) and weak two-bids which
by partnership agreement are not within a range of 7 HCP and do not
show at least five cards in the suit. "

What "partner thought" and what we agreed are entirely different concepts. Even what "partner thought" and what our implicit agreements are different concepts.

With this particular partner with whom I had never played before I had no explicit or implicit agreement about opening 1NT with a very weak hand. I had not even thought about the liklihood of doing that before the actual hand came up. When the hand came up I decided to psyche and for no particular reason I chose 1NT possibly because of the novelty since I do not normally play a mini-NT. I wasn't at all sure how it would work out after a very predictable double from the opponents.

[1eyedjack]

Well, I know that it was not the issue raised at the table, but I think that West's final pass is very close to fielding.

If the 1NT was honest, opps have gone for 3NT on a combined 17-19 points. The 1NT opener, even if honest, is never going to double 3NT, and his subsequent passes by no means expose the psyche.

West has already misstated his hand. 2S is acceptable. With a pickup partner and no agreement that a double of 3D would be an action/takeout manoever he has a problem. The "Law" suggests defending. It seems unlikely that you have a 9 card Spade fit, from partner's silence, and it could be as few as 7. 3S looks to be a losing action UNLESS it prompts the opponents to bid again, which they did.

West's action to 3S is consistent with a considerably weaker hand with considerably longer Spades, and the opponents have been given very little room to investigate their combined values. Both the Double of 1N and the subsequent 3D bid can be very wide ranging, and North may have made a very illjudged time to come in, but I have noticed a paranoia among some players against being talked out of their game by weak competitive barrage bidding.

I don't say it WAS fielded, but I do think that it is not clearcut that the psyche is exposed by the opponents making an illjudged bid after you have deliberately put them under pressure for that purpose. Hence I think it is close.

[paulg]

Cascade, on Oct 3 2004, 11:19 AM, said:

With this particular partner with whom I had never played before ...

Even though I'm fairly convinced that West has fielded the psyche, this statement would be sufficient to mean that there is no concealed partnership understanding and hence no grounds for adjustment. I would just record the psyche and move on.

West is allowed to be lucky in guessing who has misstated their values, but the more regular the partnership the less lucky West is allowed to be.

p

[1eyedjack]

cardsharp, on Oct 3 2004, 08:47 AM, said:

West is allowed to be lucky in guessing who has misstated their values, but the more regular the partnership the less lucky West is allowed to be.

I am not a bridge lawyer, and I would be interested to know whether West's powers when he suspects a psyche are regulated by the International Laws or by regulations delegated to the sponsoring organisation. In the latter case accepted practice may vary across zonal boundaries.

Where I play I was taught (and the authority has never been pointed out to me, nor have I ever investigated it, but I have simply accepted it) that in order to field legitimately a psyche that you suspect your partner has made you have to be reasonably sure, from objective information available at the table, that (1) somebody has psyched, and (2) that somebody is your partner. You are entitled to take your own hand into account in that evaluation, but a mere suspicion that partner has psyched is not adequate ... it has to be "in your face".

I think that this case you have more than a mere suspicion, but I am not convinced that it is "in your face".

It certainly makes sense that the regularity of the partnership should be taken into account. I have not heard that before but that doesn't mean a whole heap.

[luke warm]

i still don't understand, jack... suppose west did become aware at some point that perhaps east didn't have his bid... must he then continue to bid as if he's unaware? sure he can double 3nt... but the question is, how is it wrong *not* to do it?

[jdulmage]

At a local club game, I would probably not allow it unless it was an open event. I would not allow it any other time.

At any other type of game, I would allow this. It is not against the ACBL General Chart and if the opps happen to have something to which to penalize, it is up to them to know to double.

Pretty basic.

[EdmundB]

jtfanclub, on Oct 2 2004, 01:42 AM, said:

keylime, on Oct 2 2004, 01:04 AM, said:

Psyching a natural 1NT is perfectly legal. Once again, somebody that is supposed to know got it wrong - AGAIN. <shakes head>

Does anyone know the GCC andLaw 40 that direct ACBL events?

Amazing how so many people think if they make a misleading description of an illegal bid, they can call it a psyche and get away with it.

If you have a method for fielding a psyche, such as checkback, it is no longer a psyche. It is part of the system. An illegal part of the system in this case. I'm a little tired of watching people psyche a weak NT and having their partner field it. Calling it a psyche isn't fooling anybody except maybe the opponents.

Is that what happened here, or was this a case of the baby being thrown out with the bathwater? Damned if I know, I haven't seen the bidding after all. But I'm reasonably certain that's what the Lille case came down to.

based on this line of thinking, if someone passes after psyching, then that's "fielding" the psyche.

[jtfanclub]

EdmundB, on Oct 3 2004, 06:25 PM, said:

based on this line of thinking, if someone passes after psyching, then that's "fielding" the psyche.

Um, no.

If you open third hand light and your partner checks to see if you opened light with Drury, that wasn't a psyche. That was opening light.

But Cascade is right...if you don't play any conventions over 1NT, then it's legal to open it light. So if that were the case, he shouldn't have been penalized. And Casrdsharp is right, in an ordinary club you'd record the psyche and if it happened again we'd be talking about sanctions. But that isn't an option on-line here, as far as I know.

[Cascade]

jtfanclub, on Oct 4 2004, 12:17 PM, said:

But Cascade is right...if you don't play any conventions over 1NT, then it's legal to open it light. So if that were the case, he shouldn't have been penalized.

That wasn't the case. I just wanted it recored that your claim that opening 1NT on 8-9 points is illegal it is not.

Quote

And Casrdsharp is right, in an ordinary club you'd record the psyche and if it happened again we'd be talking about sanctions.  But that isn't an option on-line here, as far as I know.

Why would you sanction someone or a pair for exercising their lawful right to psyche?

[luke warm]

Cascade, on Oct 4 2004, 04:16 AM, said:

Why would you sanction someone or a pair for exercising their lawful right to psyche?

exactly

[DrTodd13]

The director was way way off on this one and should be reported to their sponsoring organization for retraining. On the issue of fielding, this is handled differently in different parts of the world. In some places, fielding except in the most obvious cases is deemed to show an undisclosed partnership understanding. In our jurisdictions, if you suspect someone has psyched and determine (for whatever reason) that it was your partner then you can take whatever action you like to avoid a disaster. If opps' bidding gives you no reason to suspect a psyche from partner and you still field the psyche then there is strong evidence of an undisclosed partnership understanding. When there seems to be 50 or 60 points in the deck and you guess that partner ha psyched then there shouldn't be a sanction for that.