Help
bd71, on 2011-September-09, 11:46, said:
I have little experience in dealing with (or making) psyche's, but faced this hand as North recently. A number of questions I'd like to ask from different directions here:
1. I recognize this as perhaps a "perfect psyche" in a number of regards: (a) partner is not likely to go crazy having already described his hand, (b) they have a perfectly safe way to escape if doubled, and © favorable vulnerability. So seems like this psyche is virtually all upside and no downside. Does that sound right to folks, or am I missing something?
Psyches have a habit to backfire in unexpected ways. It is dangerous to psyche in a suit, which ranks above the one where you have your fit. Of course there was no suit lower ranking than clubs.
There is a famous hand played by Collins, known for his flight of creative fancies, where he had to play in 7 of his psyche suit, when partner raised him there I think playing for Britain in the European championship. His team captain was not amused.
This all assumes 3♦ was a psyche and not a lead director.
Quote
2. Are there many other types of psyche's that are similarly perfect with such little downside risk? I now have this type labeled in my mind as "Big fit for partners pre-empt suit, void where opps will have game/slam, psyche the void"...are there other types of "perfect psyche" I can review to either recognize or use myself down the road?
No psyche is perfect opposite a thinking partner.
But the best opportunities are of course where partner is weak or limited and has described his hand already.
Non vulnerable it is for example now almost standard practice not to pass as partner over a Precision 1♦ opening when being broke.
Quote
3. What would you have bid ATT as NOrth? I suspected a psyche, but wasn't certain. And not sure I had methods to penalize it if I was sure; X here would likely NOT be interpreted as penalty by partner (although we don't have specific agreements). I doubled hoping partner had a 5-card major to bid; I got lucky that he did, he got unlucky with the 5-0 trump break but was able to manage.
This is one problem redefining almost all penalty doubles for take-out. This makes psyches much more attractive.
I see no real good reason to play double as anything than showing diamonds. This is not so much different when RHO bids a major over a takeout double at the one level. Most partnership play double by advancer as showing the suit, because of the possibility of a psyche.
Psyches are quite common when next opponent doubles or passes after a preempt.
Quote
4. I have no problem with psyches generally or in this specific instance, but just from a process perspective should we have called the director to "register" that there had been a psyche? Does location/setting matter here (this was in two-session open pairs at ACBL regional).
Do what you like. I think the whole procedure is silly and would not bother, particularly when I can understand the motives for the psyche well and there is no indication the partner opposite the psyche did anything questionable.
I consider psyches a normal ploy which belongs to the game, not something dingy, which should be reported.
If we can not keep our game free from the paranoids, at least keep our game free from the thought police
Quote
5. Now that East has seen his partner make this psyche, does he have any obligations for the future? That is, the next time he pre-empts at the 3-level and his partner respondes over a TO X with a new suit, is there any alert required like "partner has psyched in this situation in the past"? This seems unlikely because I would think the vast majority of similar situatinos (from East's perspective) would NoT be psyches. But I have heard that this type of alert is required in some situations...so when and under what situations would that be?
No, except when they do this frequently. Here the psych was done with 5 card support for partner's preempt (!) and a side suit void. Such a scenario is not likely to come up again before the next 2 leap years expire.
Congratulate your opponent for his creative thinking.
Rainer Herrmann
