Psyche

[bd71]

[hv=pc=n&s=sajt4hkj875dkqjc2&w=sq98hqt942dcat975&n=sk76ha63da987542c&e=s532hdt63ckqj8643&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=3cd3d]399|300[/hv]

 

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?

 

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?

 

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.

 

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).

 

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?

 

6. For resulters, the psyche worked reasonably well for them here. We got around 35% in 4H=, losing to folks making 6D= and 5D+1. We did beat a couple of pairs in 6D-1, and presumably some tables who were in 7CX-3.

[Phil]

A double of 3♦ is penalty. That's the easy part.

 

The tough part if what happens next? South will recognize that 3♦ is a psyche and should not sit, since the chances of defending 4♦ doubled are zero. So South bids 3♥.

 

Now West comes in with 4, 5 or even 6♣. What happens now is unclear but it seems some reasonable continuations lead to 6♦.

[wyman]

This looks not so much like a psyche. Rather, the opps are probably playing McCabe, where this is a lead directing club raise. This is pretty standard after a double of a preempt and is alertable.

 

There are a few threads recently about situations where X is not takeout. People have different meanings for X here. After (suit1)-X-(suit2), by my usual agreements, X shows 4ish or 5 bad cards in suit2. With a good 5+, you can just bid suit2. This hand is tough in any case. Partner surely has 3+ diamonds, and he's either got a balanced monster or he has a 4441 or 5431. Most likely, given the 3D call, opps have a 12 card club fit, and this is going to come back to you at 6C. Since I'm bidding 6D over that anyway, I'll do it now and let them guess about whether to bid 7C, of which I will make a FP.

 

Re: your questions.

 

1. If this is a psyche and not a concealed agreement, then yes you are right it is a reasonably good one.

 

2. 2M (P) 2N, and 2H/3C/3D (P) 4S come to mind

 

3. 6D

 

4. Yes, I would call because there has been an irregularity.

 

5. Blah, not an expert on alerts regarding psyches, but if west is allowed to have "natural with diamonds or some lead directing club raise" or if it's just a lead directing club raise, then it's already alertable. I don't feel I've been damaged, necessarily (we are never letting them play diamonds undoubled, and they are never playing diamonds doubled), but the director will sort all this mess out. I've never heard of a pair alerting that partner has psyched in a situation before, but it would make sense. What the laws say may be another matter.

 

Just my $0.02.

[bd71]

A double of 3♦ is penalty. That's the easy part.

 

 

Easy for you maybe, but neither my partner nor I thought it was penalty in that situation.

 

What general rule or meta-rule would you apply here to tell you this is penalty and not takeout-ish?

[bd71]

This looks not so much like a psyche. Rather, the opps are probably playing McCabe, where this is a lead directing club raise.

 

Have heard the phrase "McCabe" but didn't know details...anyway, assume it is alertable. There was no alert at the table, and I think this opposing pair is upstanding enough that they would have corrected at the end of the hand.

 

I'm confident in saying that this was a psyche.

[bd71]

2. 2M (P) 2N, and 2H/3C/3D (P) 4S come to mind

 

I guess I see more significant downsides for these psyches than the example, at least for the second example.

 

Let's say I have Kxx KQJxxx x xxx and open 2♥, and you respond 4♠. I might strongly suspect a psyche, but have to act as if partner has a strong game-going hand with excellent spades. After 4♠ and then a X by the opps, if my partner escapes to 5♥, don't I have to correct to 5♠ despite my psyche suspicions?

[wyman]

You're still allowed (nay, required) to play bridge. You don't have any UI problems here, and your partner has made a decision to pull the double of 4S to 5H. Whatever has happened, you're allowed to use your best judgment to decide what's going on at the table. You're not allowed to have agreements to control for psyches, but I can't imagine correcting to 5S after partner has gotten us into this mess.

[wyman]

Also:

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/47204-defaults-for-doubles

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/46023-penalty-doubles/

[Finch]

t 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?

 

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?

 

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.

 

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).

 

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?

 

6. For resulters, the psyche worked reasonably well for them here. We got around 35% in 4H=, losing to folks making 6D= and 5D+1. We did beat a couple of pairs in 6D-1, and presumably some tables who were in 7CX-3.

 

1. This is indeed a very common auction in which to psyche. I have the (dubious) pleasure of reviewing all recorded psyches in EBU events, and the two most common are dodgy 1NT openings in 3rd seat and invented suit opposite a pre-empt with a fit - just like this. The downside is that you haven't taken up much room: you are allowing the opponents to start investigating their best contract at the 3-level. Against good opponents I'd rarely bother psyching with a big fit, I'd rather just bid (say) 6C and leave them to guess. On this hand you might bid 3D to get partner to lead a diamond against their slam: that's the advantage of doing it on a void. If you want to keep them out of a making slam, you are actually better off not having a void (when it can get too easy for them): if I had something like Jxx xxxxx x AKxx and the auction started 3C x I would rather bid 3S than 3D.

 

2. Your description is correct for the most obviously (virtually) risk-free psyche. The other one is the psychic cue bid or trial bid (sometimes called a 'sting' cue) when you cue the suit you have 2 low in, to stop them leading them. There are plenty of other common positions for psyching, but they have bigger risks. The best psyches against good players are the most risky ones, because they are harder to deal with: the 'safe' ones are sufficiently common that most regular partnerships have agreed ways to exposing them however very few players can find their 6H contract when someone opens 3H on KQJxxxx x xxx xx against them!

 

3. Sorry, but the only answer is to double for penalties. That's why people psyche against pairs like yours: if you don't play penalty doubles here you will be taken for a ride. Good general rule: if partner doubles one suit for take-out, double of a new suit is penalties. Even if you don't like this after a 1-level take-out double, you have to do it after a pre-empt (e.g. 2H x 2S x). You've already explained in point 1 why this is such a good psyche: that's why people do it a lot, and why you have to play double as penalties to counteract it.

 

4. No harm in getting it recorded, although it's not an irregularity (as suggested elsewhere) by itself.

 

5. If they are a regular partnership, and West often psyches on this auction, eventually it becomes a partnership understanding and alertable. Once is not enough.

[Finch]

p.s. I played a match not long ago where the auction at both tables was 1H x 1S 2S P 4S and trumps turned out to be 2-2...

[jmcw]

[hv=pc=n&s=sajt4hkj875dkqjc2&w=sq98hqt942dcat975&n=sk76ha63da987542c&e=s532hdt63ckqj8643&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=3cd3d]399|300[/hv]

 

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?

 

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?

 

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.

 

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).

 

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?

 

6. For resulters, the psyche worked reasonably well for them here. We got around 35% in 4H=, losing to folks making 6D= and 5D+1. We did beat a couple of pairs in 6D-1, and presumably some tables who were in 7CX-3.

 

 

1. All upside! NO. The risk is dubious. You have stolen no bidding space from the opponents who most certainly have a game or slam. If you make a straight forward big ♣ raise the ops may be pressured to miss guess. Your opponents may have a set of tools to effectively counter your strategy you actually may be helping them.

 

2. No comment

 

3 X showing ♦ business

 

4 Yes but it is not an irregularity

 

5 No comment

[blackshoe]

You alert partnership understandings. A psych is by definition not a partnership understanding, so even if you suspect partner has psyched no alert is required - provided your suspicion is not based on partnership experience, in which case at the point you begin to suspect the psych, it's no longer a psych, but an implicit partnership understanding.

 

I haven't looked, but I'm pretty sure a lead directing bid, being artificial, is alertable in the ACBL — if it's based on a partnership agreement or understanding.

[jmc]

I am also curious about when to call the director because of a psyche. Playing in the NABC Fast Pairs in Toronto the opponents psyched and I made a joke about calling the director for the "psyche book" but didn't. Should I have? Did I fail to protect the field from this pair if they frequently psyche?

 

What say those of you who play national pair events? Call the director after an opponents psyche or move on?

[aguahombre]

I am also curious about when to call the director because of a psyche. Playing in the NABC Fast Pairs in Toronto the opponents psyched and I made a joke about calling the director for the "psyche book" but didn't. Should I have? Did I fail to protect the field from this pair if they frequently psyche?

 

What say those of you who play national pair events? Call the director after an opponents psyche or move on?

Good question. I call when the stated range of a weak two is involved, because of ACBL restrictions on conventional responses. Same with opening NT range (unless opener is Justin with his 8-bagger).

 

The purpose in calling is in case TD's have prior knowledge which would lead them to conclude that it is an agreement, rather than a deviation.

[Finch]

I am also curious about when to call the director because of a psyche. Playing in the NABC Fast Pairs in Toronto the opponents psyched and I made a joke about calling the director for the "psyche book" but didn't. Should I have? Did I fail to protect the field from this pair if they frequently psyche?

 

What say those of you who play national pair events? Call the director after an opponents psyche or move on?

 

 

I've played against pairs who have said that they always get all psyches recorded whatever the result.

For me, it depends. If it is a regular partnership whom I know often psyche, I will get it recorded because I want to know if they start doing a particular psyche very frequently. Against a pair I know almost never play together I wouldn't bother. Against a pair where one player is quite good and the other player clueless I might not bother, because the weak player will never learn to field it anyway.

 

 

 

p.s. I had always believed that the British word is psyche while the USA word is psych. This has turned into a British English thread, I love it!

[hrothgar]

I am also curious about when to call the director because of a psyche. Playing in the NABC Fast Pairs in Toronto the opponents psyched and I made a joke about calling the director for the "psyche book" but didn't. Should I have? Did I fail to protect the field from this pair if they frequently psyche?

 

What say those of you who play national pair events? Call the director after an opponents psyche or move on?

 

Here's some more interesting questions...

 

Assume that you do call the director to record the psyche

 

1. What does the director do with this information?

2. How can players access these records?

 

Cynical old me thinks that the vast majority of the records goes straight from the director to the circular file.

I wouldn't be surprised to find that some director's squirrel away little pieces of paper, never to be seen again.

I'd be shocked if there was any comprehensive system in place and absolutely flabberghast if any player was ever able to look at the data.

[Finch]

Here's some more interesting questions...

 

Assume that you do call the director to record the psyche

 

1. What does the director do with this information?

2. How can players access these records?

 

Cynical old me thinks that the vast majority of the records goes straight from the director to the circular file.

I wouldn't be surprised to find that some director's squirrel away little pieces of paper, never to be seen again.

I'd be shocked if there was any comprehensive system in place and absolutely flabberghast if any player was ever able to look at the data.

 

I know the answer for England, but I guess you are asking about the ACBL, when I don't.

[hrothgar]

I know the answer for England, but I guess you are asking about the ACBL, when I don't.

 

I am, actually, interested in what happens over the pond as well

[twcho]

Talking about psychic. One hand really needed to be mentioned is the recent match between Netherlands and Italy/England in the Zhejiang Huamen Cup. The hand I referred to is Board no. 2 at Open Room. Link: http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/vugraph_linfetch.php?id=19894

 

Nunes, 4th seat and red vs white, holds, ♠AK983 ♥AK5 ♦- ♣A6542 hearing the auction 3♦ by LHO, pass from partner and 4♠ by RHO. What will you do in this position?

[Free]

Here's some more interesting questions...

 

Assume that you do call the director to record the psyche

 

1. What does the director do with this information?

2. How can players access these records?

This does strike me as vaguely interesting :P

 

We all know nothing happens with this. If I did a similar psych 3 years ago and it's in the records, what will they do? Blame me for having a partnership understanding? :blink:

[rhm]

[hv=pc=n&s=sajt4hkj875dkqjc2&w=sq98hqt942dcat975&n=sk76ha63da987542c&e=s532hdt63ckqj8643&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=3cd3d]399|300[/hv]

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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

 

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

[aguahombre]

Cynical old me thinks that the vast majority of the records goes straight from the director to the circular file.

I wouldn't be surprised to find that some director's squirrel away little pieces of paper, never to be seen again.

I'd be shocked if there was any comprehensive system in place and absolutely flabberghast if any player was ever able to look at the data.

Yeh, but "practical old me" thinks that TD's have memories and also communicate with each other from time to time; so, maybe calling the director might be useful to them ---if not to us in certain instant cases.

 

But, I don't really think all psyches should be treated the same by either the victims or the directors. Tactical bids which have not resemblance to what they would normally have shown don't bother me at all (E.G., opening 1NT on XX X XX JTXXXXXX). What raises my antenna are bids which suggest, for instance, that opener's NT range in 3rd chair is actually 11-19 and that the partnership knows and/or allows for this.

 

Hypothetical; on day one, we meet a pair who have the following auction..

 

p-1NT

2NT-P....and opener had 11; responder also had 11. (stated range 15-17)

 

Day two, we meet the same pair and the auction goes:

 

P-1NT

2C-2S

3S-4S...responder has 4-2-3-4 seven count, but opener holds 19.

 

BTW, I am breaking tradition by presenting an actual occurrence as being hypothetical :rolleyes: