[inquiry]

The_Hog, on Jul 4 2004, 06:45 PM, said:

I would lodge a complaint about the Td's behaviour with Uday. This behaviour is unconscionable.

I agree in principle, however, some TD ban psyching. I avoid these tournments, but if I played in one, I would not psyche, and if I did psyche, I would accept my "punishment" without complaint. The only explaintation for the directors action here, it seems, was psyche's must have been banned in the condition of contest.

Psyches are a necessary part of the game. Try them, you will liike them....

Ben

[luke warm]

The_Hog, on Jul 5 2004, 04:24 AM, said:

If you never psyche, the opponents will be too trusting of your bidding. Here is an example:
(1H) X (1S) ?
You hold Kxxxx xxx AJx xx
If you know the opponents always have their bid, you would be mad to enter the auction with 2S.

this happened to me a few months back.. i *think* my rho was malucy.. i had a hand kinda like the one posted but a little better and my lho opened (1H) p (1s) my bid... now it's true i'd seen mike play before, and i'd seen him psych there (i'm assuming it was him, it was a long time back)... so i bid 2S and they passed it out

i don't think i was doubled, but i did get ripped (yeah he had his bid )... just one of those things, i'd bid 2S again in that situation, against that opponent.. maybe

[Cascade]

Flame, on Jul 4 2004, 10:17 PM, said:

Now consurning your psych, you talks about it like its a normal bid, if so dont you think the opponents have the right to know about it ?
I'm sure you dont feel like you have cheated, and im not saying you did, but law and the idea behind the law is that you cant by any mean have any extra information over your opponents. Ask yourself, are their psyches you tend to make more then others ? yes ? then you break the law, because your partner know something the opponents dont.
Its almost impossible to play 100% honest when using psyches, you will nearly always have some kind of extra knowlege.

I am not sure what you see in my post that says that this is normal. I think it was far from normal in fact at the time I was not even sure that it was a good psyche. We could have had a miracle 4♥ or the opponents might have not had 4♠ or they might not have even had a spade fit. And it turned out to cost me a near bottom.

The laws allow any psyche not based on a partnership agreement. In addition the regulators may forbid conventional psychic calls. This is the extent of the law regarding psychic calls.

I know that I have no partnership agreement to make a psychic call in this or any other situation. In the situation described we much prefer to pre-empt than to psyche - five trumps is something worth telling partner about. In my experience when I have had a choice between a psychic call or a pre-empt almost always the pre-empt is as good and sometimes it is better. Nevertheless we will on occasion psyche. I can not actually remember the previous time that I psyched with this partner - although coincidentally I did psyche again about three boards later. This second one was not actually a psyche but a minor deviation - I opened 1NT showing Good 11 to 14 with 10 hcp and a singleton. The regulations in use required me to fill in a psyche form. I filled one in for the first psyche but did not bother for the second one - I would have claimed that this was not a gross deviation as required in the laws for a something to be a psyche. Although partner did joke that it looked "gross" when I had to put it down as dummy.

Are there psyches that I make more frequently than others? Quite possibly but I normally psyche relatively rarely so I do not think this is relevant. At any rate the frequency of your psyches is not necessarily relevant. The laws state that 'habitual violations may create an implicit partnership understanding'. Note that is "may create" not "will create".

However certainly if I thought that we had an understanding then I would expect that our side would divulge that information to the opponents. My partner yesterday said to the opponents after my explanation that "noone would ever accuse Wayne of not giving all the information". In the situation that I reported earlier then our explanation would become 2♠ is to play but he may not have spades. This then would no longer be a psyche but a special partnership agreement and a legal one where I play. Over that agreement we would then be free to play redouble for rescue etc. Over a natural 2♠ as is our current agreement a subsequent redouble would show a maximum 2♠ inviting further competition. In my view it is certainly incompatible to play 2♠ natural and subsequent redouble for rescue - this just confirms that you had an undisclosed agreement.

I am happy to think that I can psyche occasionally and play 100% honest and also that my opponents can also use the same tactics.

I think the potential to psyche adds a richness to our wonderful game not that it detracts from that richness. Of course it is still possible for a player to have a concealed partnership agreement when he "psyches". However this does not justify banning psyches as there is already a law that deals with concealed partnership understandings.

[mishovnbg]

Flame, on Jul 5 2004, 01:46 AM, said:

Gerardo, on Jul 4 2004, 06:12 PM, said:

Flame: In a word, DON'T. If you don't like psyches, go lobby to get them banned in the Laws (don't wish you good luck in that) or maybe CoC, easier. Till then, they are fair game.
Psyching is taking a unusual decision, but one which psycher think it will get a better result for his/her side. It may be right, or wrong.
OTOH, bidding 7NT is just giving the hand away. Please, DON'T DO THAT. Thank you.

I have every right to expect my partner not to psych, i dont see any problem with that.

Psychs are a problem in the bridge law, because you nearly can never say that the psych's partner didnt have even the slightest advantage over the opponents, its enough that you and your partner both read about with a specific psych, or both read this thread, you already have some info about your partner bids that your opponents didnt have. With all this said, dont get me wrong, i never complained (or even called a director) when opponents psyched against me.

You have more advantages playing with regular partner long time about usage of bids and cards as extended version of any system/marking, because psyches are rare.
Misho

[AceOfHeart]

The thing about banning psyches takes the fun out of bridsge not because you psyche but because you would not suspect your opps of psyching when you have a good hand. Fore example if you hold ♠KQJxxxx ♥AQ ♦KJxx ♣A and your opps open 1♠ in 3rd sit, if you banned psyches, it would mean he will have a real spade opening,and you will not be drawned to do anything drastic, However if psyches is allowed, you could be drawned to do something brillant/stupid depending on whether the opps actually psyches, which adds to the unpredictabilty of the bidding

[luis]

Flame, on Jul 4 2004, 07:36 AM, said:

bluffing is not against bridge rules as long as it does the same to partner, and by that i mean there is no way in the world you could predict that . This "cant predict things" is not something you can just say, this mean you had no clue, or even could have no clue, for example from today you will have to alert any 1h in the same situation , because you are no longer in the possition to say "i couldnt know" , if you were in that possition before, for example if you both read a book in which this "bluff" was presented then you just cheated, because you had more info then your opponents did.
Beside this any club can deside not to allow bluffing , even if the bridge law accept them.
I am really against this kind of play, it doesnt worth it, especially if you consider yourself a good player and have intentions of wining a tournament.

Flame:
In the last tournament I played locally I've seen in 128 hands exactly 1 psyche. A 2/1 2♣ over a 1h opening with K,Kxxxxx,Axxx,xx (MPs). Spade lead against 4h, making 7 for a top. (LHO held AK of clubs).
Do you really think this wasn't fair bridge ?
A good player did this to me and I just laughed and say well done to him. It's part of the game.


ACeOfHeart:
You are wrong, forbidding psyches doesn't remove the fun of the game it removes the whole game since the laws do not allow any TD or Organization to forbid psyches. Tournaments with "forbidden psyches" are pseudo-bridge.

[Trpltrbl]

Quote

Tournaments with "forbidden psyches" are pseudo-bridge

I totally agree, next thing we know, they are going to host tournaments where you can't use conventions either.

Quote

(1H) X (1S) ?
You hold Kxxxx xxx AJx xx

I would X, trying to unmask the psych.
If my pd doesn't have ♠, he must have a strong NT hand, or a strong hand in a minor.

[nikos59]

I do not psych often, although I do like to "take a view"
(I mean, to bid differently from the majority)
quite often. But I cannot agree with the position that
psychics kill the game; for one thing, when bridge
made regularly first-page news (in the 30s) there
was one psychic per three hands or so.

For another, every great bridge player has psyched
at least once. It is difficult to find a top player more
concerned with ethics than Michael Rosenberg, yet
it is well known than in the 1992 Olympiad final,
first to speak at favourable, he opened 1NT on:
9752 - J64-A7-Q754

Partner had a flat 11-count and drove to 3NT; the defenders
(no clods; Levy-Mouiel) could not fathom what was
happening, so declarer scrambled 8 tricks. At the
other table, the US made 2NT holding the LevyMouiel cards,
so the Rosenberg psychic actually gained 2 imps.

I wonder if Flame believes that every time Rosenberg opens now
1NT at first position at favourable, his partner is Alerting opponents,
"You know, back in 1992 he bid 1NT with a 7count!"

n

[Flame]

luis, on Jul 5 2004, 07:55 AM, said:

Do you really think this wasn't fair bridge ?

As i tried to say before, psyching have a big problem which is basiclly unsovable, you will never know if his partner had any clue (not talking about knowing the smallest clue is wrong) that his partner could have made this psych.
Im not against the idea of psyching, but i believe there are many problems with it, the suvire one is what it can do to my partnerships , and another one which is more theretical about the fact that most times the partner of the psycher will have some clues (ex: seen it before, read about it on the forum, done against us, done by us, read in abook) , this one is theretical problem which dont have and couldnt have a 100% solution.
I strated playing bridge about 17 years ago, and trust me i had my share of psyches. I was trying here (with no much success) to take them off it.
Notice that more psyches are made by unexpirience players, and it costs, both in board result and more in the partnership.
Just to make it clear, im not advicing any world class player not to psych, sure when you have a solid partership that can take this psych , and you know how to psych (and when not to), it might help you, but in the real world its usually just a move by non expirence player trying to win the world by himself , just like a soccer player takes the ball and try to score rather then passing for a better appotunity.

[helene_t]

Psyches are great fun when kibitzing a game where experts play against experts.

As an intermediate player, though, I don't psych anymore. I have done it a few times with very bad results. Not in terms of IMPS, but in terms of ruining the atmosfere.

It's just that you have to be very experienced in order to deal with the ethical issues related to psyches. I'm not that experienced, nor are pd, td and opps.

[luis]

helene_t, on Jul 5 2004, 02:00 PM, said:

Psyches are great fun when kibitzing a game where experts play against experts.

As an intermediate player, though, I don't psych anymore. I have done it a few times with very bad results. Not in terms of IMPS, but in terms of ruining the atmosfere.

It's just that you have to be very experienced in order to deal with the ethical issues related to psyches. I'm not that experienced, nor are pd, td and opps.

Helene:
"There're no ethical issues"
The rules are very clear: you are entitled to bid whatever you want to bid.

I'm surprised to see so many players from all levels discuss the "ethical" aspects of psyches when they are the same ethical aspects as in the rest of the whole game. If you are ethical and play with the rules you know when you must alert opps about a "repeated psyche situation" and you know when you can't field a psyche and when you can and when the psyche become "evident".
I believe there's no "special chapter" for ethics on psyches, the regular rules for ethical bidding and play apply.

Another thing that puzzles me is how some bids that are not psyches are considered psyches, such as tactical bids and positions where a psyche is obvious and is even more likely than a normal bid.

[Chamaco]

Flame, on Jul 4 2004, 11:46 PM, said:

I have every right to expect my partner not to psych, i dont see any problem with that.

Sure, agreeing with pard that he must never psych is a plausible agreement, and you have every right to be disappointed with a partner who breaks agreements.

But what you do not have the right to do is punishing partner with bids or play which willingly lead to a bad board.
Why ?
If you are a good player it should be obvious to you: you are not punishing only your pard, but also all the other pairs at the other tables that will be damaged by the gift you just handed to your current opponents.

[Flame]

Chamaco, on Jul 5 2004, 09:09 AM, said:

Flame, on Jul 4 2004, 11:46 PM, said:

I have every right to expect my partner not to psych, i dont see any problem with that.

Sure, agreeing with pard that he must never psych is a plausible agreement, and you have every right to be disappointed with a partner who breaks agreements.

But what you do not have the right to do is punishing partner with bids or play which willingly lead to a bad board.
Why ?
If you are a good player it should be obvious to you: you are not punishing only your pard, but also all the other pairs at the other tables that will be damaged by the gift you just handed to your current opponents.

Hey
I didnt say i have bid 7nt , only that i said i will , it was just to make sure partner will realize how much it bothers me.
I do my best when i play calmly , i hate having a private director checking on my table, like happend lately with the partners im playing with.
I also prefer my opponents to feel good, and i dont like it when they think we cheated (even when we dont).

[helene_t]

luis, on Jul 5 2004, 09:08 AM, said:

"There're no ethical issues"
The rules are very clear: you are entitled to bid whatever you want to bid.

The rules are not that clear to mortal players. Examples:
1) Playing online, I open 2♣ in 3rd seat nonvulnerable, my holding is (you guessed it). Everyone gets upset. We had a thread of about 1000 postings about such issues on the Dutch online bridge forum (Step). Many people say that they won't trust this to be a surprise to partner, unless proven. I say that you have to give your opponents the benefit of the doubt since it is impossible to prove that someone is not being unethical.

2) I open 1NT with a singleton, or someone else opens Muiderberg with a 6-card. Everyone gets upset. Of course, this is irrelevant since it's not a psyche, just bad bridge. However, most people don't know what the term "psyche" means, so it becomes most unclear what the 1000-posting thread is all about.

3) Partner makes a jump overcall on a three-card. I can see that on his face since he's not very good at keeping pokerface. Should I alert it? I happen to have 5 diamonds myself, and if alert it everyone knows that I have 5 diamonds and that that's the reason why I think it's a psyche. Of course, I have to bid consistently with the normal meaning of his overcall. I'm not sure if the consistent bid would be 4♦ or 5♦.

[luis]

helene_t, on Jul 5 2004, 02:45 PM, said:

luis, on Jul 5 2004, 09:08 AM, said:

"There're no ethical issues"
The rules are very clear: you are entitled to bid whatever you want to bid.

The rules are not that clear to mortal players. Examples:
1) Playing online, I open 2♣ in 3rd seat nonvulnerable, my holding is (you guessed it). Everyone gets upset. We had a thread of about 1000 postings about such issues on the Dutch online bridge forum (Step). Many people say that they won't trust this to be a surprise to partner, unless proven. I say that you have to give your opponents the benefit of the doubt since it is impossible to prove that someone is not being unethical.

2) I open 1NT with a singleton, or someone else opens Muiderberg with a 6-card. Everyone gets upset. Of course, this is irrelevant since it's not a psyche, just bad bridge. However, most people don't know what the term "psyche" means, so it becomes most unclear what the 1000-posting thread is all about.

3) Partner makes a jump overcall on a three-card. I can see that on his face since he's not very good at keeping pokerface. Should I alert it? I happen to have 5 diamonds myself, and if alert it everyone knows that I have 5 diamonds and that that's the reason why I think it's a psyche. Of course, I have to bid consistently with the normal meaning of his overcall. I'm not sure if the consistent bid would be 4♦ or 5♦.

1) Rules prevent players from psyching artifical bids, so if your 2♣ is your artificial forcing bid you are not allowed to psyche it. If you didn't know that now you do, score adjusted issue terminated. What constitutes a 2♣ opening bid or not depends, if your 2♣ opening is not a gross distortion of an artificial forcing 2♣ then nothing happens.

2) If you open 1N frequently with a singleton your pd and your CC should say that "unbalanced shape" is possible. If you don't you can open 1N with a singleton if you want and nothing happens. One of my pds opened 1N once with a void and nobody complained or said a single word about it.
Muirderberg with a 6 card suit I think is normal and shouldn't trigger any discussion at all.

3) Of course you can't take any action based on pd's face, bid what you would have bid over a "robot" overcall and that's it. Once I overcalled a weak 2s with a void over 1cl, my held AKQJxx of spades, he felt he couldn't pass (wrong he could) and bid 4s, making 4 after they played club ace and a club (I held 9 clubs to KQJ).

[Flame]

luis, on Jul 5 2004, 10:01 AM, said:

3) Of course you can't take any action based on pd's face, bid what you would have bid over a "robot" overcall and that's it. Once I overcalled a weak 2s with a void over 1cl, my held AKQJxx of spades, he felt he couldn't pass (wrong he could) and bid 4s, making 4 after they played club ace and a club (I held 9 clubs to KQJ).

Ok lets examine this example, partner bid 2sp over 1c and partner have AKQJxx.
Lets say that the chances of partner having a weak two in spade when you have AKQJxx are 0.01% (just an example number) they are not 0, because partner could for example bid 2sp with a 7 card to the 10.
Now if im your partner you know for 100% sure i have a honsest weak 2 in spade
and although its just 0.01% chance you know this 1 in a 10000 just came.
If anyone else here like for example The_Hog, you know he makes 1 psych every 1000 hands (again just an example) so chances are it is a psych.
The opponents doesnt have this knowlege , and there is my point it wasnt 100% fair (although it was very close to it)
Now you will say they can know because in the CC we write our psyches (never frequently etc.) but what if you and your partner have some 3-4 psyches you freqently or rarly makes but you never makes any other psyches ( i think with most good players this is the case, they have psyches the do often like the makwell pair like the 1d-1M with 2/3 cards and a weak hand).
Point is you almost always know something they dont, even if its 0.0001 piece of knowlege its still a little problem.

[helene_t]

Thanks Luis, this is clarifying.

But it's also confusing, since the American laws (which apply on BBO, I supose?) apear to be different from Dutch laws. I couldn't find the ban on psyches of artificial bans in the Dutch laws, they just say that it's always allowed to psych a "convention", allthough they don't use the word "artificial".

Also, the rule that a weak two that might be a 6-card with a 4-card minor side suit cannot be called "Muiderberg", is fairly strict in the Netherlands, although I have noticed before that TDs from other countries think differently. The issue here, however, is this: If you play off-line with an unknown p, opps cannot expect you to alert his slugish calls. So it's quite clear: you can always get away with a missing alert of a slugish call or psyche by an unknown p, while you may or may not get punished when playing with a known p. Now comes the problem with online bridge: do you have to alert your own slugish customs when playing under self-alert rules with an unknown p? The rules of the BF are not written for online bridge, and the rules of the bridgesite are self-contradictory. Last year, the technical comitee seemed to disagree internally on this issue, I'm not sure how the laws are interpreted at the moment.

[luis]

Flame, on Jul 5 2004, 03:20 PM, said:

luis, on Jul 5 2004, 10:01 AM, said:

3) Of course you can't take any action based on pd's face, bid what you would have bid over a "robot" overcall and that's it. Once I overcalled a weak 2s with a void over 1cl, my held AKQJxx of spades, he felt he couldn't pass (wrong he could) and bid 4s, making 4 after they played club ace and a club (I held 9 clubs to KQJ).

Ok lets examine this example, partner bid 2sp over 1c and partner have AKQJxx.
Lets say that the chances of partner having a weak two in spade when you have AKQJxx are 0.01% (just an example number) they are not 0, because partner could for example bid 2sp with a 7 card to the 10.
Now if im your partner you know for 100% sure i have a honsest weak 2 in spade
and although its just 0.01% chance you know this 1 in a 10000 just came.
If anyone else here like for example The_Hog, you know he makes 1 psych every 1000 hands (again just an example) so chances are it is a psych.
The opponents doesnt have this knowlege , and there is my point it wasnt 100% fair (although it was very close to it)
Now you will say they can know because in the CC we write our psyches (never frequently etc.) but what if you and your partner have some 3-4 psyches you freqently or rarly makes but you never makes any other psyches ( i think with most good players this is the case, they have psyches the do often like the makwell pair like the 1d-1M with 2/3 cards and a weak hand).
Point is you almost always know something they dont, even if its 0.0001 piece of knowlege its still a little problem.

Flame:
Knowing your pd's style is not unethical.
If you don't bid game or 3N with 14 balanced when your pd overcalled because you know he overcalls light then as long as the opponents are entitled to that piece of information if they ask there's nothing unethical.
I think you are confusing pd's style with an implicit agreement. The rules forbid a partnership from having an undisclosed agreement. The rules don't forbid you from making a decision based on your partner style and the rules don't forbid you from making a bridge-logical decision (example: deciding pd either psyched or picked the wrong card from the bidding box when you have AKQJxx of spades and he announced a weak 2 in spades) .
The only thing that you have to do is give your opps the information you have about pd style if they ask.

[luke warm]

which is exactly why, next time i play with richard and next time he opens 1nt in 3rd seat, i'll pm the opps and say "i've seen him psych in that position before"

i see nothing wrong with doing this because the thought that he psyched did enter my mind.. it won't affect my bidding, but i think the opps have a right to this info

[Flame]

luis, on Jul 5 2004, 10:29 AM, said:

The only thing that you have to do is give your opps the information you have about pd style if they ask.

Yes luis i agree, but again this cant be done in 100%, its just not possible to tell them exactly what you know, maybe even there are things you know about your style that you arent aware of.
I tried to examplain this point is 100% thoretical (and shouldnt prevent anyone from psyching), in practice it happend wather you psych or not, you will sometime not give all the information you have.