Questions arising from a recent local tournament

[Rebound]

I am curious to know your thoughts on the following:

 

1. If a player makes a lead-directing double and has the opening lead, he or she must lead that suit unless void. (I'm not saying I agree or disagree with this statement.)

 

2. Second seat 2♠ opening on AKxxx x void J10xxxx - is this a psyche?

 

3. The trump suit is clubs. After the lead of a spade by South, who is declarer, when it comes to East's turn to play, he pulls a card from hand but then says, "Did you lead a club?" and puts the card back in his hand. When told the lead was a spade, he suggests calling the director.

 

4. Auction: 2♣ -(P)- 2♦ -(P)- 2♠ - all pass... no alerts or questions asked until after the final pass.

[hrothgar]

Question 1: From the sounds of it, I made a lead directing double and I'm on lead. My double says that I want partner to lead the suit. I'm certainly NOT going to lead off AQTx or some such.

 

Question 2: A psyche is defines as a gross deviation from agreement. The answer here depends on the specific agreement

 

Question 3: There could be UI, but damned if I know what it would show

 

Question 4: It looks like bridge auction. I normally play that 2♠ is forcing. Its unclear whether a non-forcing 2♠ response requires an alert. Probably depends on jurisdication. You'll have a hard time getting an adjustment unless you can demonstrate damage. In order to do so, you'll need to show that the player sitting over the 2♣ opening has a hand that

 

A. Can not overcall a strong 2♣ opening

B. Can not overcall a forcing 2♠ rebid

C. Would want to overcall non-forcing 2♠ rebid that was properly alerted

 

Of course, this presumes that the opponents are playing a storng 2♣ opening. The analysis is different if there was a failure to alert a precision style 2♣ opening.

[Guest Jlall]

I am curious to know your thoughts on the following:

 

1. If a player makes a lead-directing double and has the opening lead, he or she must lead that suit unless void. (I'm not saying I agree or disagree with this statement.)

No of course not. Aside from that fact that the opening leader can lead whatever he chooses, there are many holdings I would make a lead directing X with that I wouldn't lead from. Or I may have KQJx and choose to lead my side suit stiff.

 

2.  Second seat 2♠ opening on AKxxx x void J10xxxx - is this a psyche?

 

Assuming it was supposed to be a normal weak 2, no. Right HCP range and 1 spade off. Bizarre though. A 2H opening, now THAT would be a psyche :P

 

3.  The trump suit is clubs. After the lead of a spade by South, who is declarer, when it comes to East's turn to play, he pulls a card from hand but then says, "Did you lead a club?" and puts the card back in his hand. When told the lead was a spade, he suggests calling the director.

 

I guess there's UI but I don't know that it demonstrably suggests anything, it would depend on context. If it did, there's not a problem unless the player's partner does something indicated by whatever the UI suggests.

 

4.  Auction: 2♣ -(P)- 2♦ -(P)- 2♠ - all pass... no alerts or questions asked until after the final pass.

 

I don't know if a non forcing 2S is an alert, but I'd guess it isn't in ACBL.

[bigmax]

2. Second seat 2♠ opening on AKxxx x void J10xxxx - is this a psyche?

 

 

Shouldnt you ask for 13th card?

[Rebound]

2. Second seat 2♠ opening on AKxxx x void J10xxxx - is this a psyche?

 

 

Shouldnt you ask for 13th card?

Oops. There should be a 7th club.

[Finch]

I am curious to know your thoughts on the following:

 

1. If a player makes a lead-directing double and has the opening lead, he or she must lead that suit unless void. (I'm not saying I agree or disagree with this statement.)

 

2. Second seat 2♠ opening on AKxxx x void J10xxxx - is this a psyche?

 

3. The trump suit is clubs. After the lead of a spade by South, who is declarer, when it comes to East's turn to play, he pulls a card from hand but then says, "Did you lead a club?" and puts the card back in his hand. When told the lead was a spade, he suggests calling the director.

 

4. Auction: 2♣ -(P)- 2♦ -(P)- 2♠ - all pass... no alerts or questions asked until after the final pass.

1. No, of course not.

 

2. Depends on what 2♠ showed systemically. If it was a weak two in spades, then no. If it was a strong two in spades, then yes.

 

3. I'm not sure what to comment on. There is some possibility of some UI being given, but I'm struggling to see what.

 

4. Can't comment without knowing what the alerting regulations are. What jurisdiction are you playing in?

[mr1303]

1) Definitely not. You can lead whatever you like unless you've been restricted by a previous infraction that forces you to lead/not lead a certain suit.

 

2) Assuming a weak 2 in spades, no I don't think it's a psyche. Not my choice of opening, but not the worst bid I've ever seen

 

3) Yes, the player is right, the director probably should be called. So he can make a correct ruling. I'm not sure what the correct ruling is, however. If partner made a switch on a hand where a switch would really not be prudent, an adjusted score may be required.

 

4) We don't know enough here. For one thing, the 2D bidder may have a truly terrible hand and be taking a view. I always alert a strong 2C opening, but I understand that isn't normal procedure in ACBL land. As Hrothgar says, it would be unlikely you'd get an adjustment here unless there was damage.

[Rebound]

Re:

1. I'm glad to see I haven't lost my mind. A player I know said this is what she was told by a pair who both are directors at a local club. It came up when at their table playing in an ACBL game. I told her I had never heard of such an atrocious rule. I guess they are the next ones to talk to about this.

 

Re:

2. Strictly speaking, I would have been inclined to call a 5-1-0-7 shaped weak 2 a psyche, but since my partner did it and we got a great result out of it, I will accept the majority decision here ;-)

 

Re:

3. I was the cause of the infraction in the actual event. My LHO was declarer. Clubs, as I mentioned, were trump, and she lead a spade. I had the spade I pulled out almost on the table when I suddenly thought I might be revoking. I couldn't not see declarers lead clearly due to lighting in the venue. Rather than simply asking to see what was lead more clearly before I played, I unfortunately asked a most inappropriate question. I felt I had told everyone at the table I held a trump - hence I asked declarer if she would like the director. She graciously declined. However, when I won the next trick, I deliberately lead a suit other than the one in which I was previously trying to get a ruff, i.e. I had 1 heart, partner had the boss in the suit. I lead a diamond instead. I felt this was an equitable outcome.

 

Re:

4. What if I told you the were playing about as close to Standard American as you can get these days and that his partner was as surprised as his opponents when he passed 2♠ ? The actual hand was Q xxx 9xxxx 109xx. As it turned out, this was in a swiss teams and we scored up 12 when our partners at the other table made 5♦X

[helene_t]

1. If a player makes a lead-directing double and has the opening lead, he or she must lead that suit unless void. (I'm not saying I agree or disagree with this statement.)

 

Maybe in Klaverjassen. Not in Bridge, though.

 

2. Second seat 2♠ opening on AKxxx x void J10xxxx - is this a psyche?

 

There seems to be an epidemic causing people to dilute the term "psyche". It is something very different from an undiciplined bid. This doesn't remotely resemble a psyche.

 

3. The trump suit is clubs. After the lead of a spade by South, who is declarer, when it comes to East's turn to play, he pulls a card from hand but then says, "Did you lead a club?" and puts the card back in his hand. When told the lead was a spade, he suggests calling the director.

 

Isn't it sufficient to call the director after the play? The facts have been established. The only reason to call the director now is if it might be an option to make a penalty card (English term?) of the trump you implied to have, but I can hardly imagine that.

 

4. Auction: 2♣ -(P)- 2♦ -(P)- 2♠ - all pass... no alerts or questions asked until after the final pass.

 

With some imagination there could be a problem (2♣ being weak with both majors? 2♦ being immediate second negative?) but this is far-fetched.

 

Under Dutch laws (FWIW), an artificial 2♣ opening might always be alertable (the rules are unclear), but if it is less than forcing to game it certainly is. However, it is hard to imagine any damage.

 

On the other hand, the fact that 2♠ was passed may not imply that it was non-forcing. A few days ago my "expert" partner (I was a sub, can imagine why, btw) passed my 2♣ opening (he held ♣xxxxx and out), making six.

[Blofeld]

2. Strictly speaking, I would have been inclined to call a 5-1-0-7 shaped weak 2 a psyche, but since my partner did it and we got a great result out of it, I will accept the majority decision here ;-)

Why does it matter whether it was a "psyche" or not? Psyches get good results too sometimes.

[han]

1. Absolutely not.

 

2. Absolutely not.

 

3. There may be UI, the partner of the talker should be told to ignore the comments.

 

4. It seems that they play 2S as forcing but the passer took a view. Or perhaps they just don't know what they are doing. The pass was clearly a bad idea, but nothing illegal happened. What is the problem?

[barmar]

Re: 1. opening leader having made a lead-directing double

 

During the dinner break at a tourney over the weekend we were discussing some famous expert who made a lead-directing double even though he expected to be on lead. He led some other suit, hoping to find his partner with the ace -- he did, and partner was then able to lead the suit that he'd asked for.

 

I can't imagine any rule that requires opening leader to lead the suit he doubled. There's nothing in the laws about lead-directing bids, I believe. There are a number of cases where declarer can forbid or require a suit to be led, but I think they all involve some form of unauthorized information or a bidding infraction. The case you describe is a valid auction, so there are no lead restrictions.

 

Do those same directors also think that if the partner had been on opening lead that he would be required to lead the doubled suit? A lead-director is a request or suggestion, not a requirement.

[Rebound]

4. It seems that they play 2S as forcing but the passer took a view. Or perhaps they just don't know what they are doing. The pass was clearly a bad idea, but nothing illegal happened. What is the problem?

I did not say there was a problem, nor that I was seeking any form of adjustment. I merely wished to guage your response to this situation.

[Rebound]

Re: 1. opening leader having made a lead-directing double

 

During the dinner break at a tourney over the weekend we were discussing some famous expert who made a lead-directing double even though he expected to be on lead. He led some other suit, hoping to find his partner with the ace -- he did, and partner was then able to lead the suit that he'd asked for.

 

I can't imagine any rule that requires opening leader to lead the suit he doubled. There's nothing in the laws about lead-directing bids, I believe. There are a number of cases where declarer can forbid or require a suit to be led, but I think they all involve some form of unauthorized information or a bidding infraction. The case you describe is a valid auction, so there are no lead restrictions.

 

Do those same directors also think that if the partner had been on opening lead that he would be required to lead the doubled suit? A lead-director is a request or suggestion, not a requirement.

I agree entirely with this. I wished to get some additional opinions before approaching the pair in question to see if that's what they really think.

[Rebound]

2. Strictly speaking, I would have been inclined to call a 5-1-0-7 shaped weak 2 a psyche, but since my partner did it and we got a great result out of it, I will accept the majority decision here ;-)

Why does it matter whether it was a "psyche" or not? Psyches get good results too sometimes.

It mainly matters only to me, I guess, for furture events I will play with this partner.

[mycroft]

Re: 5107 weak 2S a psychic?

 

Playing with T: wouldn't even faze him. In fact, I opened 2S just yesterday on AQJxx x x QTxxxx. We play highly undisciplined weak 2s, and AK fifth at MPs in a major seems better than JT seventh in a minor, never mind that my 3C are "happy to play 3NT".

 

Playing with M: clear psych. We play disciplined weak 2s, and "I don't care if it's AKQJT, it's not a six card suit". And besides, it's probably a 1S (or intermediate 2C) opening in that system.

 

Playing with I: well, we're playing EHAA, so it's a psych. That's an absolutely standard weak 2C opener - even though I'll probably be bidding spades sometime in the auction - nothing I can do will convince partner that my spades aren't longer if I open 2S.

 

A psychic call is a 'Deliberate and gross misstatement of length or strength' - of your agreements. Your agreements may not be mine - your agreements may not be the same as your agreements with someone else, in fact, as the above shows - and if your agreements are non-standard, the opponents need to know. But it's not a psych unless it's a deliberate and gross violation of the agreement.

 

Of course, your agreements may not be legal in the game you're playing, at which point we get what I posted yesterday (in a different thread) "well, either you psyched, or you're playing an illegal and undisclosed partnership agreement. Pick your poison."

 

Michael.

[Rebound]

As always, thank you all for your comments.

 

I was interested to see the conditions under which 2♠ might be considered a psyche since my partner (who made the call) was the first person to use the term in reference to this hand. I disagree. We play fairly disciplined weak 2 bids, however, I don't believe this hand fits the "gross" part of gross misstatement.