lucky81

Justified to do what? To give the correct answer. The method used can be justified to give the correct answer, as I have said. Please think about it for a while so that I do not have to explain more. You will probably see WHY the method is correct. Or else you will see a counterexample for the method (you won't), proving the method incorrect. If you really do not see it AFTER you have really thought about the method (which I think you have not done at all) - then I will be more than happy to justify the method in detail.

A method is correct if and only if it always gives a correct answer. What is your definition of a correct method? Let me state a more general proposition: the method will work for all types of fits (not just 6-3). I leave the (easy) proof as an exercise.

You are wrong by saying that the method is wrong, as it can be easily shown to be correct, i.e. to give the correct answer. I believe in his latest simulation he was trying to count the following: assuming that given two hands (not necessarily a partnership) have a 6-3 spade fit, what is the distribution of the other two hands. He correctly assumed this would be the same distribution as for NS having a 6-3 fit. His method just gives more samples using the same set of deals than your method. He stated what he was doing by saying e.g. "195462 hands with a 6-3 spade fit between any 2 hands". ANY 2 hands. Not "any partnership". He is not counting anything 3 times - the numbers are not even divisible by 3. He is trying to count something else than you think he was trying to count.

Your explanation is a more convoluted way to say the same thing. I would even say my explanation is more correct, since he explicitly was trying to count 6-3 fits between ANY two hands, so including NE, NW, SE, SW. In other ways, he's not counting anything three times too many as you are implying but he's simply missing some of the spade fits in case there happen to be 2 in a single hand.

In your 6-3-3-1 hands there are TWO 6-3 fits that you are counting only once. If you correctly count them twice, you get: 2-2: 105625 or 40.55% 3-1: 130000 or 49.91% 4-0: 24837 or 9.54%

Psyches were allowed in that tournament. The TD said that at my table - "psyches are allowed, but your partner protected your psyche".

Yes, I see no problem with that. Especially in a goulash. I have seen some bluffs from my partners, some worked, some did not, but I never felt bad or angry at my partner. It's part of the game, it's his decision, even if it's a bad decision - everybody has a right to be a bad player. Edit: I understand you might not like my bidding if you were my partner. But what do you mean that you would not appreciate it if you were a TD? Isn't TD's job to apply the rules rather than appreciate the plays?

This was a goulash tournament. I don't know how the goulash hands were generated and what the "hand distribution probability" was. But after seeing the previous 6 hands in which one side had 11 hearts and the other 13 clubs, or something similar, and the bidding by both sides went up to the level of 6 in all but one hand, I decided that bidding 1 spade might work out here. I think goulash hands are supposed to be quite random and full of surprises and I thought 1♠ would be fun too.

[hv=d=e&v=e&n=sajt7632hqt85dtcj&w=skq9hj973dj86cq96&e=shak62dkq973ckt83&s=s854h4da542ca7542]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] This was in an individual goulash tournament. I was East. We had no agreements with my partner. I opened a psychic 1♠. East South West North 1♠ - Pass - 1 NT - Pass 4♥ - Pass - 4♠ - X 5♦ - Pass - 5♥ - X Pass - Pass - Pass During the play, North kept saying "What was that 1♠ bid??" and he called the TD. The contract went down 2. The director corrected it to 6♥X -3. He explained that W should have corrected to 5♠ after a double. Then he said that laws are against those who use psychic bids and even if only 5% of players would correct to 5♠, he must change the score. Also he said that I could have 7 spades + 5 hearts and my partner should take that into account. I think I showed that my hearts are better than spades - thus the 4♥ bid and later I took out the 4♠X. Also I passed 5♥X. It seems to me that my partner had the right to assume that I prefer hearts, plus the fact that his hearts were longer than spades. Edit: I will add that this was a BBO LAND Midnight Goulash $1 tournament.