luis

The last two were: x,Axx,Kxx,QJxxxx I opened 1c, pd bid 1d and I rebid 1s we end up in 3d they had 4sp. Since 1d usually denies 4 spades I decided they did have a huge spade fit and I can always retreat from spades to diamonds so that was quite logic in my mind. Or this one (can be labelled as crazy by conservative minds) Kxxxxx, x,JTxxx,x After two passes I opened a 12-14 1NT planning to pass a transfer to hearts (2d) or to clubs (2s) if pd transfers to any other suit we are super and if he bids 2NT I can retreat to 4s and even hope to make it. Both were things I decided at the moment and never had occurred to me before. Between both hands I played about 100 boards without doing anything strange, in general I believe that if you play well you really don't need to psyche but from time to time it's fun to do something creative :-)

1 and 4. I think I made my point in that thread. For the ones not knowing what happened a player opened 2s in 3rd with QJxxx and out (CC saying: 5-9), declarer refused to take a finesse thinking the 2s opener must have the hK for his opening and played and exotic endplay (MPs). Then when the hand was over -IMPORTANT- the partnership accepted that it was common for them to relax weak 2s in 3rd seat. Declarer called the director and after a good ruling by the TD an AC changed the result based in undisclosed information or something like that... You can always ask, if you don't ask it's because you are trying the hand twice, either by doing what you should according to the CC or by a ruling if they don't have what the CC says they should have. I firmly believe that opening weak 2s in third position with even 0 is not enough to call the TD and ask for any ruling.

Ok if you want feedback I have no problems in providing you my information: I've been playing for 14 years. I think there're 2 kinds of psyches: the crazy ones and the logic ones, the crazy ones are the poker-psyches, things that can go very very wrong or very very well depending on things you don't know. On the other side there're logic psyches, positions where you know some bid may be difficult to handle by the opponents while it should be harmless for your side. Some logic psyches are not even a psyche at all but considered psyches for the definition of the term. Example 1m-x-1M with 2 cards or similar. I do a crazy psyche once every 1000 hands. I reallly don't like them but I d like to have some in my "Records" so some players remember that :-). Fear leads to the dark side. I do logic psyches once every 100 boards approx. Whenever my regular pd makes a bid where I recall a psyche or something strange I inmediately alert the opponents about what I have seen before like "he's known to have done this with such and such"

I think the problem is quite simple, first of all I assume you don't want to change your system and of course you couldn't do that at the table. So if 2NT and the cuebid are not systemmic then we have only 1NT and 3NT left, since 1NT is a serious underbid I pick 3NT with the optimism of the game bonus if 3NT makes. If you can have a 9 counter then 9+14 = 23 more than many makeable 3NTs we play every day and with points concentrated after the opening bid of 1d I think the 14 counter can be upgraded to 15/16 just because of the position. With the systemmic considerations in mind the meaning of 3NT is now clear to the 1s bidder. 3NT. Quite simple.

I respect that Gerben but I don't believe you :-)

About the ACBL appeal: The solution is worst than the problem. They rule against the partnership and advice them to write 0-10 in their CCs? Does this make any sense? Everybody will have 0-10 or similar and everybody will have insurance against terrible rulings. But this is not the right way to deal with the problem, weak 2 styles vary a lot and what you want to know is the partnership style about weak 2s, not if they have 5 or 3 or 6 or some number of points. I think the CCs should be changed to indicate weak 2's "STYLE" not HCP range, and if convinient indicate "average" HCP ranges for your weak 2s and a checkbox indicating if this is STRICT or "flexible". Aggresive players can write 0-6 + flexible. Solid dinosaurs can use 6-9 + "strict". And declarers will have the information they need then is up to them. Furthermore players should stop complaining about misscounting the number of points a weak 2 opener has, specially in third seat. I think they are using a technicality of the CC to get a better result instead of the one they got at the table when they intentionally decided to take a line of play, please don't tell me you really though that a 3rd seat weak2 bid can't be made with 0... cmon!

Almost. I play 3♣ here as "forcing but not promising a rebid" so if pd bids 3♥ or 4♣ or 3NT I can pass. If he bids 3♦ or 3♠ then we are in a game forcing situation. That is only in your system. IN Sayc or 2/1, 3C is gf. No way you can pass 3H or 4C. It's not my system just a partnership agreement, after an overcall new suits at the 2 or 3 level are forcing but not promising a rebid. In SAYC you just don't know :-)

4♠ I'm 100% sure that if someone suggests something else he would bid 4♠ at the table if faced with this hand :-)

Since this is MPs I think 2♣ is fine, I'd bid 3♣ playing IMPs without hesitation. About opening 1NT It depends on the weather above the table...I'd open 1NT against some players and 1♣ against some others.

Almost. I play 3♣ here as "forcing but not promising a rebid" so if pd bids 3♥ or 4♣ or 3NT I can pass. If he bids 3♦ or 3♠ then we are in a game forcing situation.

2♦ maybe I'm the only one bidding 2♦ but it's more descriptive than 1NT or 2♠ in my humble opinion.

3♣ automatic, is this a problem?

Maybe one of the worst rulings of the year. I'm kindly surprised by the diplomacy of the people here in the forums, this TD does deserve some strong words about his job but since we are being kind I won't start it. There's one crucial mistake: TDs should not (must not) take into consideration bridge-related decisions since they are not qualified to do that they should only rule according to the laws and if there were bridge considerations to be taken then instruct the players to appeal or appeal himself.

A Psychic Call is defined as " A deliberate and gross misstatement of honour strength or suit length." So unless you and partner agree systemically to overcall 1S on, say, KTxx x xxx T98xx (note, I'm generous and adding the honours to the bid suit!), I would say that xxxx x xxx T98xx is a "gross misstatement of honour strength" (and if you do agree that my first hand is a 1S overcall, I hope you Alert their opponents!) I'm guessing you didn't slip and mean to pull out a pass, so there's "deliberate"... So there's your guidelines - right there on page 2 of the Laws :-). Nothing borderline about it, and I would expect you to be "tagged with a psych" anywhere - unless, of course, you have evidence for their agreement to make psychotic overcalls, and disclose to opponents as required by the SO. As far as rulings psychics is concerned, I'm sure you've read the WBF Psychic Bidding Guidelines and the relevant parts of the WBF Code of Practice for Appeals Committees. While I personally believe those guidelines are too tight, they *are* the relevant guidelines. I believe I have stated above (if not, another thread about psychics) the saw that a [tactical|creative] bid is "a psychic call I would make" and a psych is "a creative bid made against me". It's just that people recoil from the word "psych" so strongly - even those who are in favour of the practice - that they try anything to explain away *their* psychics. Feel free to psych, take your good results when it's right, take your lumps when it's wrong, but please don't try to weasel out of what you're doing by explaining that you made a "tactical bid that [worked brilliantly|went wrong]". And, please, when you are effectively psyched out (and there's no evidence of a CPU or illegal field, of course), say "nicely done, <opponent>" or "yep, ya got me this time," and move on. Yeah, yeah. I'm preaching to the converted, I know. Michael. Dude, I didn't overcall 1s, my pd opened 1c and I bid 1s, having 4s and 5 clubs I think that the 1s bid is as sound as it can be, if they have game we can find a spade defense and if pd has a bomb then we should be able to make at least 5c so passing 1c is a losing option in both scenarios. Now call that a psyche and I will be extremely surprised.

Hand #1 a bidding problem: [hv=d=w&v=n&s=sxhakjt9642dxxcxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] LHO opens 1♦, pd bids 4♠, rho bids 5♦, now what ? Hand #2 a play problem: [hv=d=n&v=b&n=s32hqt83dak8ckqjt&s=skqth942dj65ca432]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] You get to 3NT after 1c by North 1NT by south (10+GF) 2c relay by north 2d=no majors by you and 3NT by north. Average opponents. West leads a spade and east plays the 5 you win the spade ten and now what? You have to decide if you are going to play on hearts hoping for spades 4-4 or a defensive mistake or if you are going to """run""" the diamond jack...

It wasn't a bad idea (see above), it turned out to be a great move! It also fooled you, like it fooled Jason Hackett and all others (except Luis who remembered the hand). Roland Actually I didn't remember the hand Roland :-) But in the recent trials here in Argentina the guy on my right bid 5h exclusion with xxx in hearts and a void in clubs, I lead the hA -bored- down 1. That's why I said "I've seen this before" :-) When the player bidding exclusion is good and has done some """"smart""" or fancy bids if there's not a clear reason to lead something else I think that the percentage lead is the supossed void suit.

Heart Ace I've seen this before.

I agree with all you are saying, except this. ty or typ when dummy comes down is fine, but why dummy must say glp I can't understand. In real life bridge you say thanks or something similar when declarer sees dummy, but dummy never says good luck partner. Why should it be different on the internet? I don't think it's impolite not to wish partner good luck. I think it's just fine to do the same as you do at the table with an ftf partner. Roland Saying "good luck" here is quite common, I usually say "good luck" when playing f2f, maybe different habits in different parts of the world :-)

The big problem now is trying to determine if an "odd bid" is a psyche or not. Opening 1NT (15-17) with 14 or 18? Cue-bidding a suit without a stopper? Opening first chair with a 10 count, or a 9 count? Opening third chair with a "preempt" that most opened one of suit with? A misclick (was it a psyche or an accidental click). A 1NT opening bid with right hcp but a singleton? You will get yourself involved in a lot of disputes, if your players realize, that psyche's are not allowed.. disputes over rather this bid or that one was a psyche or not. ben First to Fred: THANKS! I've been trying to convince a good number of local experts than that kind of 3NT bid is not a psyche and shouldn't be called a psyche. In one hand I bid 1s over 1c with xxxx, x, xxx, T98xx and I was flagged with a psyche nobody could understand that if I wanted to psyche I would have bid 1h or 1NT but not 1s the suit I do have.... I would love to see some guidelines for TDs about this published by the WBF or the ACBL.... And to Ben: Most of your examples Ben are more a question of style rather than psyches. And I think that most of the examples you've given should be in the CC if they have been discussed or they MUST be added to the CC as soon as a case appears and the pd discusses if that was ok or the player should never do that again. About NT I think opening style it MUST be disclosed in the CC. In One of my CCs for example I have: 1NT: 15-17 (14 is ok frequently upgraded never 14 4333, 18 never) Hands with a singleton A or K can be opened 1NT if that simplifies the auction Irregular distributions are fine in 3rd position, rare in 1st or 2nd. About opening with 9 or 10: Part of General approach and style in the CC, either you open light or you don't. If you don't and you open light some hand then it's not exactly a psyche but a system violation. And who will care? Everybody opens light these days... About opening a preempt in 3rd suit with opening values: Isn't that normal bridge? Since pd is a passed hand I can have 0 or 12 and I think that's normal bridge.

6 is fine and if we make 7 6 is still fine.

I think that declarer has to win the spade lead and play a spade to the Jack, cash the heart ace and ruff a heart then he can choose what to play. Maybe we can get some information from the heart spots they play. There's the chance to drop KQx of hearts tripleton before taking a decision about the diamonds. So if the Q or K of hearts falls in the 2nd round I play diamond to the K and ruff a heart finish drawing trumps and now I can either win with diamonds 3-3 or if the hearts are stablished entering dummy ruffing a diamond. If the heart K or Q doesn't appear then depending on the heart spots I may be inclined to take the diamond finesse or play for the drop.

I like 2♦ 10 points, 2NT wouldn't be my choice but I accept it, 6 points. 3NT is terrible if launched to game then I think 4s is better than 3NT. I like to play game in this hand, no problem going down one or 2 in 4M

1. Shared, both 2♠ and 4♠ are bad calls, there's no need to make any of those north could bid 2NT and even over 2♠ south can bid 3♣ to offer some help in clubs, after all south has 5 spades and he already said he has 5 so 4♠ doesn't make sense. 2. I don't like the neg X, I prefer to bid 2♦, negative doubles usually deny a biddable suit. 3. The double of 4♠ is out of this world.

If hearts are splitting we don't need the ruffs, do we? I play low spade from dummy and see what happens I like the chances of 4s on a normal line, now east has to return a heart or a diamond and we cash the spade ace and see if hearts are splitting, if not you can always ruff a heart stablishing the suit and eventually take the club finesse for your tenth trick.

First of all I hate the situation but I like the 4♥ bid, it's just too unlucky that they did have a 4♠ bid. Had I started with 2NT I would be embarrased after 3♠-4♥-4♠ thinking that an initial 4♥ could have shut them. Now the 5♥ bid by my passed hand pd is scary, I would like to know about his style and the options he have to open the bidding. I think I'm going to pass 5♠ because I'm really really afraid they may have a spade slam here.