Psychs

[Cascade]

I should add, my view on psyches has been influenced by people who have helped me understand the laws, how and why psyches are permitted. I think a lot of the fear and loathing comes from lack of understanding.

Agreed, and I try not to do it at club games and things, and I understand the other point of view, but barring them really is not in the spirit of the game imo.

How hard do you have to try?

[mtvesuvius]

I should add, my view on psyches has been influenced by people who have helped me understand the laws, how and why psyches are permitted. I think a lot of the fear and loathing comes from lack of understanding.

Agreed, and I try not to do it at club games and things, and I understand the other point of view, but barring them really is not in the spirit of the game imo.

How hard do you have to try?

As a junior, sometimes very hard :)

[matmat]

Since it is all love and piece I'll try to add a little controversy:

 

I don't have a problem with psyching against beginners in a club game.

agree with Hannie

[Jlall]

lol I just read the thread that spawned this and learned that I am saying almost exactly the same things as Fred.

[cherdanno]

lol I just read the thread that spawned this and learned that I am saying almost exactly the same things as Fred.

You said it without the digs against other forum posters though.

[awm]

lol I just read the thread that spawned this and learned that I am saying almost exactly the same things as Fred.

One of the things I found curious was that Fred seemed to be arguing that psyching is okay "sometimes" but not other times. I have heard this viewpoint before, but on the hand in question that spawned this thread:

 

(1) The opponents were stars (supposedly world-class). This is different from the usual argument I hear about it being unsporting to psych against beginners.

 

(2) It was a pickup partnership (sub actually) so there could be no question of partner taking advantage or having additional information.

 

Fred seemed to be arguing that "it is not sportsmanlike to psych in club games" regardless of the caliber of the opponents you face in that particular round. This seemed strange to me, and would also seem to greatly reduce the opportunities to psych (i.e. it's not enough that your opponents are experts, you can only psych in an "all expert" field) to the degree that it becomes tough to get "psyching practice" as it were and gain the experience to know what sorts of psychs work. Perhaps he didn't intend it this way, but it seemed a weird argument to me. It also seems to me that a world-class player complaining when an opponent made a successful psych against them is not very sporting...

[Jlall]

Yeah if I was playing against Fred for instance I wouldn't feel bad about psyching even if it was at a club game.

 

Random stars are often not very good players, but I would assume they're good enough that I would not feel bad psyching against them. I would never guess that they are world class though.

[CSGibson]

I think, strategically, psychs should only be used against near equal level opponents, or opponents that are better than you, otherwise you often lose more than you gain from them (i.e., you are throwing away some of your natural advantage).

 

Other than that, I agree completely with the comments Justin has made about this subject.

[Cascade]

Yeah if I was playing against Fred for instance I wouldn't feel bad about psyching even if it was at a club game.

 

Random stars are often not very good players, but I would assume they're good enough that I would not feel bad psyching against them. I would never guess that they are world class though.

Quite right.

 

Everyone else is world class :)

[inquiry]

I wonder if it can be unethical to psyche, is it unethical to false-card. I mean, we have been teaching people about carding, and signaling, and when to play higher of touching honors and when to play lower. Is it fair to screw them up by intentionally falsecarding to trick them?

 

As to the original thread. I have to admit that I think psyching in the ACBL game as rule is probably not sporting, but it is not unethical. There is a difference. And when you sit down against two gold stars, for that round only, I would no longer consider it unsporting. But here is the problem, if you ONLY psyche in ACBL games when facing expert opponents, that becomes a hidden agreement (well with pick up partner that is not an issue unless he reads post here). This makes all your bids honest against other pairs. This becomes a problem.

 

I gave the very unpopular answer above... Rarely acceptable; needs more than one of the above conditions, I am thinking maybe once about every four sessions with the obvious caveat that if I need a board to WIN, late in an event, I have to admit I am more likely to create something than at other times... after all 2nd place is just the highest loser. :) I rather have a shot at first or tenth than to end up 2nd to 4th.

[aguahombre]

What do we think about psyching in various situations --at various levels? My regular partner (spouse) and I don't like to use them ourselves. I have psyched once in a 23-year partnership. if I ever do it again I will get the same ration of crap i got the first time from her. Do we have a private understanding? Yes, that our bids mean what they are supposed to mean.

 

We also think the opponents should bid however they like, within the rules. It is up to us to judge whether we believe a player has unduly "fielded" his partner's psych through other than logic, call the director in those rare instances, and abide by the decision of the director or commitee.

[jillybean]

How often does any player psyche or encounter psyches? Playing on BBO, I rarely encounter one and nowhere near once every 4 sessions. TD’ing on BBO I get a call about a psyche perhaps once in every 3 tournaments and most of the calls complaining of psyches aren’t psyches at all.

[Phil]

Unfortunately, in the real world most people do not have jillybean's attitude. From experience, I would say almost always that psyching against beginners at a club game leads them to feel cheated or screwed which really makes them mad, and ruins their afternoon or maybe even leads to them quitting bridge. They probably will dislike you and other experts like you forever.

 

Is this rational? No. But tbh I do not think that bridge at the club is just about the game of bridge for these people, it's something that is social and fun rather than killer attitude competitive. I feel like I am on their turf and should accomodate them, much like if they were at a tournament they are on my turf and should expect whatever I have to throw at them.

 

Perhaps I should adopt the attitude "psyching is part of bridge, we are playing bridge, if they can't handle it tough." Perhaps I should even psyche frequently since it is like stealing candy from babies. But instead I adopt the practical attitude that it isn't worth it, and it isn't nice to do something that will ruin their bridge experience in a stupid non serious event.

This captures my views perfectly.

 

Please don't feed me the line about 'psyching is bridge'. This is for those that live in ivory towers and are detached from what happens on a day to day basis in clubland.

 

Once you've seen a nice beginner leave a duplicate game because of experts psyching and such, you'll understand this viewpoint.

[mike777]

I see this often, people get confused over the meaning of rational.

 

In fact most behavior is in fact rational that often seems other.

 

 

For example something may be legal, yet we hate it, despise it.

Some behavior maybe illogical but rational.

[1eyedjack]

I am supportive of measures that encourage beginners to retain their interest and motivate them to return. If banning psychs in their protective environment is the best way to do this then I would go along with it. At some point they will have to progress beyond that stage and educating them not to get upset about such measures at an early point is in my opinion an important task which should hopefully reduce the period in which they have to rely on this crutch.

 

That said, I observe that a "no psych" rule on BBO tournaments is now the norm, contrary to the laws. ACBL tournaments (and a few others) excepted. Some have introduced a "semi-ban", forbidding a psych in 1st or 2nd seat. These bans are now so prevalent on BBO that I cannot believe that they are motivated by a desire to protect beginners. The tournaments concerned are generally open to all and my guess is that beginners form only a small proportion of the entrants.

 

There must be some other motive behind the regulation being imposed by the TD/host in most of these cases. It may be down to TD-laziness: If psychs are banned the TD does not get troubled by so many TD calls, or if someone psychs despite the ban then the TD finds the ruling easier to resolve. I think that this is a false economy. You still get lumbered with whether a marginal deviation is a psych (TD normally rules that it is, by the way, which is another deviation from the laws). But I suspect that the rule is more because the TD personally dislikes being psyched against and believes that everyone else ought to feel the same way, and feels safety in numbers now that every other TD feels that banning psychs is flavour of the month.

 

My fundamental objection to no psych tournaments is only partly based on the laws. It certainly has nothing to do with my desire to psych. As psychs fail more often than succeed I positively want my opponents to have the opportunity to psych against me.

[jillybean]

Once you've seen a nice beginner leave a duplicate game because of experts psyching and such, you'll understand this viewpoint.

experts psyching 'and such' , what else would you ban in order to protect beginners who chose to play in open games?

[cherdanno]

Once you've seen a nice beginner leave a duplicate game because of experts psyching and such, you'll understand this viewpoint.

experts psyching 'and such' , what else would you ban in order to protect beginners who chose to play in open games?

How about cheating when writing down the score? (Happened to me in my first duplicate and didn't notice it until looking through the results at the end.)

Ok these weren't experts, of course. And it amused me more than driving me away.

[jkljkl]

Please don't feed me the line about 'psyching is bridge'. This is for those that live in ivory towers and are detached from what happens on a day to day basis in clubland.

 

Once you've seen a nice beginner leave a duplicate game because of experts psyching and such, you'll understand this viewpoint.

Hello

 

peculiar how different our experiences are.

 

a) I cannot remember to have seen a beginner leave a Club due of a psyche. This since

- psychs are extremly rare.

- Sometimes they don't even get it.

- They bid their hand without giving a thought about opponents bids.

 

b) I remember many beginners being stunned due of ferocious attacks by those 20+ years customer that consider a deviation bid/hand a mortal sin.

 

Do I think that b) is a natural extension of the supported view about "nop pychs"? Yes I do.

 

ciao stefan

germany

[Cascade]

Once you've seen a nice beginner leave a duplicate game because of experts psyching and such, you'll understand this viewpoint.

I will reserve judgement until I see it happen and then we will see if I understand.

 

In the meantime I will treat such views with the disdain that they deserve.

 

Surely educating players that this is a normal part of the game is a much better strategy that putting pressure on players who are employing a legitimate tactic in some sort of attempt to make them feel guilty would be much better.

 

This negativity towards legitimate tactics really deserves one of Justin's LOL's.

[jdonn]

If a beginner quit coming to a club because they felt cheating after being psyched against, how would anyone know it? I doubt they would come back one last time just to announce they were quitting. I'm not trying to argue it happens all the time since I honestly don't know, but two very unconvincing arguments that it doesn't happen often are "I have never seen it happen" and "I am/was a beginner who didn't mind at all and/or didn't quit when it happened against me."

 

I would certainly argue that if you want beginners to keep coming back, rudeness and slow play are (much) bigger problems than psyching. Now that may be only due to frequency, since both those occurrences seem to happen all the time whereas psyching is less frequent. But I think it's pretty clearly the case nonetheless.

[wclass___]

Let's say you have already made a psychic bid in known auction (e.g. 1♥-[X]-1♠).

Does it mean that you can't psyche here with same partner anymore?

Or you have to prealert?

Can psyche be part of a system?

[Gerben42]

I am one of those intermediate players some think best to protect from psyches. When I play in an open field, I hope the players will play their best game. If this means psyching, false carding or playing multi so be it, it’s all part of this wonderfully complex game. The first time I encounter something new it can throw me and I get a bottom board. I don’t stop playing, I can learn from it and maybe the next time or the 5th time it happens I will be prepared and get a top board. That buzz when you bid your game in a difficult auction, despite what the opps throw at you, keeps me playing the game.

 

I want to thank you for this great post, Kathryn. As I have written in the other thread, this is what is really wrong with the bridge world. On the one hand we want to be taken seriously by the other mind sports, on the other hand the large majority of players is taught a different attitude and unsurprisingly now has this attitude of wanting to play a no-fear game.

 

It should be so that people are taught that the REAL game of bridge is even more fun than what is going on in clubs around the world, and that when someone makes a successful move against them, they congratulate their opponents rather than make them feel like cheaters.

 

That's the real difference between Bridge and Chess / Go / Draughts, I think. Even in the local chess cafe or chess-in-the-park, people play to win by all legal means. In bridge clubs, they expect you to play only part of the game because otherwise it is not considered fun or fair.

[the hog]

Let's say you have already made a psychic bid in known auction (e.g. 1♥-[X]-1♠).

Does it mean that you can't psyche here with same partner anymore?

Or you have to prealert?

Can psyche be part of a system?

Well at one stage there were psychic controls which were actually parts of systems. I think Bulldog had some, and am I right in suggesting Kaplan Sheinwold did as well? Anyway they are outlawed now.

 

By the way, I agree with Gerben. That was an excellent post, Kathryn.

[david_c]

I don't psyche much anyway. But I would only do it against opponents who I know will appreciate it. In a club game I'd say the same thing as gnome - it's not worth the hassle. I play bridge for fun, and if opponents are annoyed at me, that's no fun for me.

 

As a TD, I would recommend that people don't psyche against players who are likely to be upset by it. But if they're going to go ahead and do it anyway, that's their choice to make. However, I do think that if you are going to psyche you have to be especially careful with your behaviour. It seems to me that many psychers are rather bad at dealing with the negative reactions that they get. Two things I've seen happen when asked to explain a psyche:

 

- Uncontrollable laughter. Not good. Gives the impression that you're having fun at the opponents' expense.

 

- Saying, "I can bid what I want" or "Deal with it" or words to that effect. This may all be true according to the Laws, but it comes across as arrogant and obnoxious.

 

Generally I find people who have psyched tend to react too defensively when the TD is called. If they could avoid this then psyching might not be so much of a problem.

[Cascade]

It seems to me that many psychers are rather bad at dealing with the negative reactions that they get.

Someone ought to be doing something about these negative reactions.