[gwnn]

Suppose I am an evil player who is in 3rd seat favorable, holding some bad hand.

It goes

pass pass to me and LHO opens 1♥ out of turn.

Do the laws allow me to open 1♥ then, as it is a psyche that is quite likely to work?

[FrancesHinden]

Yes.

Depending on where you play, your NBO may also have allowed you to agree methods with your partner following an opponent's irregularity. So in EBUland, you can have sepcifically agreed with your partner that if LHO opens out of term, you now play mini NT or super-random pre-empts (say) - although this is subject to all the usual rules on agreements, so you can't agree to psyche.

In the ACBL I believe you aren't allowed to have specific agreements.

[brianshark]

Correct me if I'm wrong but can't LHO just double as his partner is forced to pass throughout?

[FrancesHinden]

Law 23.

Quote

....When the play has been completed the Director awards an
adjusted score if he considers the offending side has gained an advantage
through the irregularity*.

* as, for example, by partner’s enforced pass.

[TylerE]

But what if the "legal" 1♥ call was judged to be wild or gambling? (Which it pretty much is by definition...)

[Rossoneri]

What Frances said is correct.

[blackshoe]

TylerE, on Jan 14 2009, 10:29 AM, said:

But what if the "legal" 1♥ call was judged to be wild or gambling? (Which it pretty much is by definition...)

What if it was? All that does is complicate the TD's job - if the irregularity caused damage, there should be a score adjustment. That a psych might be judged "gambling" just means that if the psych itself contributed to the damage, the NOS don't get compensation for that part.

[helene_t]

I thought the offending side is allowed to use the information that partner can't bid, so he is allowed to double 1♥ for penalties. And if the non-offenders are damaged by offender's partner's obligation to pass? Well, it's normal to pass a penalty double, isn't it a slightly different situation the lawmakers had in mind, such as when offender opens a weak two in clubs which wouldn't have been available without partner's obligation to pass?

In the case discussed here, I think Csaba acts at his own risk when he decides to psyche a 1♥ opening.

[Echognome]

There is probably something to be said as well for "doing the right thing" even if it isn't in the laws. Let me explain perhaps by way of an example.

I have been in situations where the opponents have started playing the wrong boards, say, in a pairs event. What has happened is that they have started the bidding on a board and then somehow realized they were playing the wrong board. Maybe the TD came around and noticed or whatever. So the TD gives them the correct board and later on you face these same opponents on the boards that they had started out of order. The TD instructs you to bid as usual and if the bidding carries on as it did initially, then the board can be played as normal. Otherwise, the opponents will have UI and the board will be adjusted (I think to Avg+/Avg - ). So here is a situation where we can score an average plus just by psyching or bidding something unusual. Totally legal, but I think doing so would not be in the spirit of fair play. I'm not saying that if you have a hand on which you would normally psych you should alter your play, just that if you psych just to secure your average plus, you are within your rights, but I wouldn't think much of the action.

So while I think psyching the opponent's suit to really just mess them up because they had inadvertently bid out of turn may be legal, I wouldn't think it was the "right thing to do".

[Trinidad]

brianshark, on Jan 14 2009, 08:14 AM, said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but can't LHO just double as his partner is forced to pass throughout?

So what?

The auction will be (assuming West is dealing and South is bidding out of turn):
West

Spoiler

..

North

Spoiler

..

East

Spoiler

.

South
Pass

Spoiler

...

Pass

Spoiler

....

...

Spoiler

....

1♥

Spoiler

........................

1♥

Spoiler

....

Dbl
Pass

Spoiler

...

Pass

Spoiler

....

??

At this point East can just bid naturally. What he has achieved is that North is barred from bidding for the rest of the auction.

So a double by the out of turn opener doesn't help his side at all.

Rik

[kenrexford]

I'm ot sure that the "psychic" idea works as a psychic. However, without knowledge of the rules in effect, I think the idea is slightly different. Does bidding 1♥, known to be "false" by partner (a weak takeout anticipatory cue?), does this create a situation where 2♥ by the offender would now not be natural? Does that somehow affect the ruling?

I mean, if the auction were, say, P-P-1♣-1♥, is the auction still alive, in that perhaps Advancer can bid, because the 1♥ bid is sorta the same, kinda, with mere "no inference to be taken" rules? If so (I don't know), then a 1♥ opening seems like the only call available for force a one-sided auction. Maybe.

[barmar]

helene_t, on Jan 14 2009, 12:04 PM, said:

I thought the offending side is allowed to use the information that partner can't bid, so he is allowed to double 1♥ for penalties. And if the non-offenders are damaged by offender's partner's obligation to pass? Well, it's normal to pass a penalty double, isn't it a slightly different situation the lawmakers had in mind, such as when offender opens a weak two in clubs which wouldn't have been available without partner's obligation to pass?

But isn't this the same thing? Without partner's obligation to pass, it would be a takeout double, not a penalty double, so the penalty double only becomes available as a result of barring partner.

[jdonn]

It's authorized information to LHO that RHO has to pass (that's why people who have barred their partners so often open 3NT and pray), but there is also a rule against intentionally breaking another rule or forcing a penalty on your side with the intention of gaining any sort of advantage. That is a subjective call to make, but generally very easy.

So making a 'penalty' double of 1♥ seems perfectly fine to me, since he couldn't possibly have opened out of turn in anticipation of doubling a bid you hadn't yet made. However, if my side is having a longer auction and partner bids 4♠ on an auction where I'm expected to pass it, it would be illegal for LHO to bid out of turn and bar his partner if he did so intentionally to make sure his penalty double won't be pulled.

It should also be noted regarding the defense of the hand, the out of turn 1♥ opening is UI for RHO.

I think law 23 is being misinterpreted. I take 'gaining an advantage through the irregularity' as referring to something like 'forcing partner to pass so he will not pull your penalty double'. It doesn't bar you from simply getting lucky due to guessing what to do when partner is barred. If that was the intention then there wouldn't even be a point to finishing the hand after the bid out of turn.

[orlam]

barmar, on Jan 14 2009, 02:11 PM, said:

helene_t, on Jan 14 2009, 12:04 PM, said:

I thought the offending side is allowed to use the information that partner can't bid, so he is allowed to double 1♥ for penalties. And if the non-offenders are damaged by offender's partner's obligation to pass? Well, it's normal to pass a penalty double, isn't it a slightly different situation the lawmakers had in mind, such as when offender opens a weak two in clubs which wouldn't have been available without partner's obligation to pass?

But isn't this the same thing? Without partner's obligation to pass, it would be a takeout double, not a penalty double, so the penalty double only becomes available as a result of barring partner.

So by the rules LHO's double becomes a penalty double. But then by another rule you want to forbid him to use the penalty double?
Interesting.

[barmar]

orlam, on Jan 14 2009, 02:18 PM, said:

barmar, on Jan 14 2009, 02:11 PM, said:

helene_t, on Jan 14 2009, 12:04 PM, said:

I thought the offending side is allowed to use the information that partner can't bid, so he is allowed to double 1♥ for penalties. And if the non-offenders are damaged by offender's partner's obligation to pass? Well, it's normal to pass a penalty double, isn't it a slightly different situation the lawmakers had in mind, such as when offender opens a weak two in clubs which wouldn't have been available without partner's obligation to pass?

But isn't this the same thing? Without partner's obligation to pass, it would be a takeout double, not a penalty double, so the penalty double only becomes available as a result of barring partner.

So by the rules LHO's double becomes a penalty double. But then by another rule you want to forbid him to use the penalty double?
Interesting.

You're right, this is tricky. Because it would then mean that the NOS can psyche 1♥ easily, safe in the knowledge that they can't penalize you.

But I still don't see the difference between this and the situation Helene described.

[skjaeran]

jdonn, on Jan 14 2009, 08:16 PM, said:

It's authorized information to LHO that RHO has to pass (that's why people who have barred their partners so often open 3NT and pray), but there is also a rule against intentionally breaking another rule or forcing a penalty on your side with the intention of gaining any sort of advantage. That is a subjective call to make, but generally very easy.

So making a 'penalty' double of 1♥ seems perfectly fine to me, since he couldn't possibly have opened out of turn in anticipation of doubling a bid you hadn't yet made. However, if my side is having a longer auction and partner bids 4♠ on an auction where I'm expected to pass it, it would be illegal for LHO to bid out of turn and bar his partner if he did so intentionally to make sure his penalty double won't be pulled.

It should also be noted regarding the defense of the hand, the out of turn 1♥ opening is UI for RHO.

I think law 23 is being misinterpreted. I take 'gaining an advantage through the irregularity' as referring to something like 'forcing partner to pass so he will not pull your penalty double'. It doesn't bar you from simply getting lucky due to guessing what to do when partner is barred. If that was the intention then there wouldn't even be a point to finishing the hand after the bid out of turn.

Josh is correct.

Law 23: Whenever, in the opinion of the Director, an offender could have been aware at the time of his irregularity that this could well damage the nonoffending side, he shall require the auction and play to continue (if not completed). When the play has been completed the Director awards an adjusted score if he considers the offending side has gained an advantage through the irregularity*.
* as, for example, by partner’s enforced pass.

The out of turn opener couldn't have been aware at the time of his irregularity that this could well damage the nonoffending side. On the contrary, it's heavily odds on that it would damage his own side to bar partner.

Anyway, after 1♥x get passed around to the "psycher", why should he sit?

[ggwhiz]

I once opened a strong notrump in 4th chair, the bidding reverted to my lho who passed a balanced 22 count but I heard from him again after 3 passes and my 3 notrump bid.

If he can psyche THAT, all else seems fair.

[sheepman]

What if your dealer playing a wknt only in first seat and RHO passes out of turn?