[Chamaco]

I have seen many threads with people angry they cannot make psychic bids in tourneys.

We all know that a psyche is not illegal "per se" as long as partner is unaware of it.
My suggestion is that there could be a button "Psychic bid" alerting the director at the moment you are about to make a psyche.

Online play has the advantage that you can selfalert a psyche to a director without revealing it to your partner. The TD in this case would have the possibility to watch the developments in real time.

With the "Psyche" button at the player's disposal, the TD would also be more justified to opt for penalizing the bids.

[bearmum]

Chamaco, on Jul 12 2004, 10:51 PM, said:

I have seen many threads with people angry they cannot make psychic bids in tourneys.

We all know that a psyche is not illegal "per se" as long as partner is unaware of it.
My suggestion is that there could be a button "Psychic bid" alerting the director at the moment you are about to make a psyche.

Online play has the advantage that you can selfalert a psyche to a director without revealing it to your partner. The TD in this case would have the possibility to watch the developments in real time.

With the "Psyche" button at the player's disposal, the TD would also be more justified to opt for penalizing the bids.

THIS sounds like a good suggestion to me - (BUT I realise might be a HUGE problem for programmers )

But maybe worth doing because IF "psych" button NOT pushed TD might have a better idea if pard of psych bidder has fielded the psych ---- NAD maybe make it easier for TDs to "have a record" of those who psych either

1 by reporting it
2 by NOT reporting it

I agree that last sounds as tho I'm having a bet "each way" but from what I've read on this forum regarding psych bidding it MIGHT be good to look at those who alert psych bids to TDs ( maybe reported to central complimating of such alerts?) and TDs reporting psychs NOT reported when the get AGGREVIEVED opps calling them for adjust ?

[hrothgar]

Interesting suggestion which may have some merit:

I have the following worries:

(1) Directors are overburdened as is. I'm not sure that they need extra alarms going off.

(2) Directors might decide to wander by the table to see what's going on, how things might develop. In turn, the opps might be able to extract information when the director suddenly showed up following RHO's white versus red 1NT overcall opposite a passed hand partner.

(yes, I recognize that the two points are somewhat contradictory)

The following might be a superior implementation of the same idea.

(1) Allow players to flag a bids a psyches.
(2) The psyche flag is invisible while the hand is being bid/played.
(3) The psyche flag is visible to spectators and the director when they are watching the table
(4) This flag is visible to everyone when the hand is being reviewed as a bridge movie

Regardless:

From my own perspective, facilities like this aren't particularly useful without some kind of database like the one that Stephen Pickett was working on with Bridge Browser. Selectively recording incidents when a given player psyched without tracking examples where they didn't psyche in the same situation really doesn't provide much value. I'm be amused to understand how many directors bother to actually record anything and if so, how they save information. Still, this sort of thing might be useful someday...

Hrothgar

Who still doesn't believe that "psyches" exist.

[bearmum]

hrothgar, on Jul 13 2004, 01:02 AM, said:

Interesting suggestion which may have some merit:

I have the following worries:

(1) Directors are overburdened as is.  I'm not sure that they need extra alarms going off.

(2) Directors might decide to wander by the table to see what's going on, how things might develop.  In turn, the opps might be able to extract information when the director suddenly showed up following RHO's white versus red 1NT overcall opposite a passed hand partner.

(yes, I recognize that the two points are somewhat contradictory)

The following might be a superior implementation of the same idea.

(1) Allow players to flag a bids a psyches.
(2) The psyche flag is invisible while the hand is being bid/played.
(3) The psyche flag is visible to spectators and the director when they are watching the table
(4) This flag is visible to everyone when the hand is being reviewed as a bridge movie

Regardless:

From my own perspective, facilities like this aren't particularly useful without some kind of database like the one that Stephen Pickett was working on with Bridge Browser.  Selectively recording incidents when a given player psyched without tracking examples where they didn't psyche in the same situation really doesn't provide much value.  I'm be amused to understand how many directors bother to actually record anything and if so, how they save information.  Still, this sort of thing might be useful someday...

Hrothgar

Who still doesn't believe that "psyches" exist.

Hogarth - I THINK you and I are on same wavelenth - I DO NOT want directors to be burdended with MORE alarms (They do a GREAT job -- and ANYONE who disputes this should be FORCED to direct TEN BBO Tourneys and deal with ANY disputes which eventuate -- IF they can't do a 'good directors' job than BANNED from complaining for at LEAST six months)

I agree FLAGGING ( where BBO loggs flagging -- as opposed to the director of the particular tourney) psychs is really good idea ( that's what I thought "alerting to director" was doing )

AND MAYBE the director could "wander by a table" and be INVISIBLE (once again IF) the programmers of site are able to arrange it

[scoob]

i think the flagging idea is the best approach, particularly if it's visible as part of the hand record from other tables.

last time i checked (not recently) alerts were not part of the hand record viewable from other tables

perhaps two birds here

[guggie]

I wonder if you should set much value to a director appearing at a table without td call. When i am directing, I regularly make my "round among the fields" to see how tables are progressing, and it appears to me a lot of directors do the same.
Nevertheless I prefer the flagging idea.

[hrothgar]

guggie, on Jul 12 2004, 05:54 PM, said:

I wonder if you should set much value to a director appearing at a table without td call. When i am directing, I regularly make my "round among the fields" to see how tables are progressing, and it appears to me a lot of directors do the same.
Nevertheless I prefer the flagging idea.

Quite honestly, I don't normally pay much attention to who is at the table.

With this said and done: If I see a strange looking auction AND the director just happens to show up at the same time....

[nikos59]

Add a button for psychic bids, says Chamaco.
Then, add another button (or a semibutton?) for semi-psychics.
Yet another button perhaps for tactical bids.
A good idea would also be to add a button for when you
are walking the dog, as they say. This button could have the
shape of a dog for mnemonic reasons.
Another button, when you misclicked a previous bid.
With all those buttons, perhaps the screen will be cluttered;
if this is the case, we may remove superfluous buttons
like the suit/numbers etc. After all,
who will want to play bridge except perhaps for lawyers?

n.

[spwdo]

hi,

Another psyche thread, is no need i think for a button because after someone making a spychic and it goes noticed most opps inform tds, most understand these and inform nicely, once in a while we get a lot of capss and !!!! or ???? when we are informed.

What i m interested in is has anybody count the number of spychic bids been bid in the last europeen championship, must admit i dont follow vugraph as often as i want so if anyone can help that saw a lot of these matches.

Woud be nice to find out if players/teams representing their countrys( i assume good players) are frequent/regular/on occasion /rarely/not at all spychic bidders.


Marc

[the hog]

"Hogarth - I THINK you and I are on same wavelenth "

Hmm Hogarth?? Richard, since when have you taken up portraiture?

[1eyedjack]

hrothgar, on Jul 12 2004, 07:02 AM, said:

(2) Directors might decide to wander by the table to see what's going on, how things might develop.  In turn, the opps might be able to extract information when the director suddenly showed up following RHO's white versus red 1NT overcall opposite a passed hand partner.

Perhaps there is a case for a TD being permitted to remain (at his discretion) totally invisible when attending a table in a tourney.

spwdo, on Jul 12 2004, 04:21 PM, said:

after someone making a spychic and it goes noticed most opps inform tds

I think that generally (throughout the bridge world) psychers should be encouraged more to report their own psyches (where reporting mechanisms and requirement exist) without having to rely on opponents doing this.

I quite like this idea, especially Hrothgar's amendment. I perceive a couple of problems:
A) When someone psyches but forgets to check the psyche box it could create ill-feeling at the end of the hand, when in fact nobody is damaged.
B) When someone forgets the system and misbids he will obviously not check the psyche box and yet the legal consequences are similar (I am assuming here that the systemic agreement is not in doubt and/or is agreed as otherwise than as the bidding progressed). This may lead to further acrimony after the hand is over (but perhaps that is inevitable anyway).

[Chamaco]

nikos59, on Jul 12 2004, 07:49 PM, said:

who will want to play bridge except perhaps for lawyers?

n.

Nikos,
I thought you knew the bridge laws.
They say that if you psyche you should self-report the psyche to the TD.

If you have to report your own psyche to the TD, the most effective and helpful way to do it is doing it in real time (one thing that the online play allows without disclosing it to pard).
After all, you should do it anyways, the bridge laws explicitly state this.
The TD may choose or not to follow the development in real time, according on how much he is busy.

This tool is not intended to be yet another obligation to the TD, nor to try to complicate his tasks.
It is intended to be a help for him: he knows where and when a psyche is occurring and there is a potential for trouble.
Much better for him to know it beforehand than after the facts occurred.
Of course he may decide to ignore the psyche announcement, he's the director, he will decide.

The button facility may be admittedly a bit cumbersome, but there are alternative solutions (none of which am I particularly fond, I simply like the idea of preinforming the TD of the psyche) : e.g. just using the TD call facility which allows to specify the reason for the TD call; the psycher may just click the exsting "Call TD" and enter in the box asking for the reason for the call that he is about to psyche.

There may be other better ways to do it which do not cross my mind, of course.
I simply believe that directors will have an easier life by knowing that a psyche is occurring in real time rather than after it has occurred and players have already lost their mind arguing with each other (not to mention the loss of time in clocked events).

Mauro

[Cascade]

Chamaco, on Jul 13 2004, 05:34 AM, said:

I thought you knew the bridge laws.
They say that if you psyche you should self-report the psyche to the TD.

There is no such law Mauro. Maybe you have a local regulation.

This is what the laws say about "psychic bidding"

Definitions
"Psychic Call — A deliberate and gross misstatement of honour strength or suit length."

Law40A
"LAW 40 - PARTNERSHIP UNDERSTANDINGS
A. Right to Choose Call or Play
A player may make any call or play (including an intentionally misleading call — such as a psychic bid — or a call or play that departs from commonly accepted, or previously announced, use of a convention), without prior announcement, provided that such call or play is not based on a partnership understanding."

[Frosty]

I like the idea of a flag that would be part of the Board records. This way there is no need to involve the TD unless there are additional or resulting issues. At the same time, the TD could see the intention of the bidder to make an informed decision when needed.

Frosty

[Free]

I don't see why we would need an extra button to warn a TD that we made a psych. As some said before, opponents usually call the TD when they see what's gone wrong. And what how do you deal with people who psych and don't press the button (or forget it)?

Rules say clearly that you're allowed to make psychic bids, so lets just keep it at that, and no new cards or flags or whatever. There's no need for it, and it's a waste of time to program such gimmic!

Current steps in the psych process are just fine:
1) you make a psychic bid
2) opps notice you fooled them
3) opps call TD because they think you did something unfair
4) TD doesn't adjust the score since you didn't do anything wrong
5) opps are angry and give you another good score

[paulhar]

nikos59, on Jul 12 2004, 02:49 PM, said:

who will want to play bridge except perhaps for lawyers?

Exactly what I've been saying on the thread 'Is bridge a difficult game?" I knew that if I waited long enough, I'd find someone that saw things my way. Little did I know it would be on a different thread

Those that have read that thread know that I (and perhaps many others) play a lot less than they used to in tournaments for the same reason. Please don't make BBO a game for lawyers too - I'll have to give up bridge altogether!

Yeah, sure the overworked directors are going to get help that they can choose to ignore if they wish. But...

When you bid like I do, maybe all the bids should be alerted as psyches!

Quite honestly, the biggest problems are going to come when someone else thinks a bid is a psyche and in reality, it turns out that the player is a novice (who may have 'Expert' in his profile because he's the best in his town) who doesn't know any better. Already people are rude to such novices when they get fixed by them. But to try to administer disciplinary actions against them for failure to register a psyche when they thought they were bidding their hand?

And of course, some 'psyches' might be a failure to alert instead.

And there are people that I've seen play on BBO for hours on end, after saying that they should have gone to bed hours ago. Now, this poor bleary-eyed person thinks his partner opened and 'responds' 1NT when in fact his opponent opened. Of course he doesn't record the psyche - what a brewhaha waiting for a place to happen!

[1eyedjack]

Cascade, on Jul 13 2004, 03:22 PM, said:

Chamaco, on Jul 13 2004, 05:34 AM, said:

I thought you knew the bridge laws.
They say that if you psyche you should self-report the psyche to the TD.

There is no such law Mauro. Maybe you have a local regulation.

All reporting regulations are contained in secondary legislation delegated to NCBOs.

So yes, it depends on where you are.

[xx1943]

Chamaco, on Jul 13 2004, 03:34 AM, said:

.... just using the TD call facility which allows to specify the reason for the TD call; the psycher may just click the exsting "Call TD" and enter in the box asking for the reason for the call that he is about to psyche.

Hi Mauro

This is a great idea.
Combined with a list of all TD calls instead of popping-up-windows it would be excellent.

Al

[guggie]

A list of TD calls, that would be GREAT.

[dogsbreath]

Hi .. if Uday gives me a 'Psyche' button, then I'm going to press it whether I psyched or not .. the chance to psyche a psyche is not something I'm going to miss ..what then?
Rgds Dog

Quote

furnulum pani nolo