Psyche

[Sjoerds]

[hv=pc=n&s=skj96ha764d76c742&w=sq7432ht83dqt8ct6&n=s85h2dakj9432ckq9&e=sathkqj95d5caj853&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=pp2ndp3sppp]399|300[/hv]

 

Experts NS and EW Teams

After EW went for -4 they called me.

2NT was clearly a psych and the convention card stated "rare" at that chapter. This was the second time this match that this pair bid 2NT as a psych(admitted).

EW stated too that dbl wasn't the best action to take; they have no agreements over dbl in this situation. Dbl after an opening of 1NT means ♠ and ♥.

 

South stated: "be happy I didn't double"

 

How do you rule

[Lanor Fow]

Was it the same person who pyshced twice?

 

Were the partnership in question asked how often they psyche this, or when the last time they psyched this before this match?

[Sjoerds]

Was it the same person who pyshced twice?

 

I don't know. Is it important?

 

Were the partnership in question asked how often they psyche this, or when the last time they psyched this before this match?

 

I leave this one open for the moment.

[helene_t]

South stated: "be happy I didn't double"

He obviously fielded his partner's psyche when he failed to double, and I think this is a quite serious violation, especially as it was the second time in the match a 2NT opening was psyched by this partnership.

 

Edit: maybe East's double disclosed North's psyche since from South's point of view it is nearly impossible that East holds both majors or a penalty double if North has a real 2NT opening. I am not sure if I would buy that excuse, I am inclined to say no.

Edited October 30, 2012 by helene_t

[wank]

south can work out that someone's at it. it only makes sense for it to be north, so i'd say no problem unless in a jurisdiction which treats fielding of psyches harshly (i'm thinking of england grrrr).

 

obv now they've psyched 2nt twice it's in danger of becoming a partnership understanding, so if a 3rd time comes up i'd be inclined to adjust. i would also be asking them if they had done it before and making sure the national authority's records were checked for a pattern, in case this wasn't only the 2nd time.

[bluejak]

Psyching is not illegal: psyching twice in the same way in a short space of time is not illegal.

 

So what is [or might be] illegal?

 

MI? "Psyches are rare." Well, my psyches these days are probably very rare. But that would not stop me psyching on consecutive boards if the boards and opponents suited. Nor does it mean a description of very rare is MI. So, unless we find this pair regularly psyches, there is no infraction.

 

What else? Fielding a psyche, ie a breach of Laws 40A3 and 40C1. The method of dealing with fielded psyches differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, which is one of the reason we ask OPs to state jurisdiction when asking questions.

 

Does the pass of 3NT suggest South is allowing for the 2NT not to be natural, ie is he allowing for his partner not to have his bid? Of course it does: he had game values opposite a natural 2NT bid and took no positive action. Definitely fielded.

 

In England/Wales this is a Red Psyche. Ave-/Ave+ and a further PP. In this case the South action is so egregious [see, I can use that word too! :)] that the normal 10% is not enough, so 10% or equivalent is not enough. 9 imps to E/W whatever the result in the other room as a combination of Artificial Adjustment and PP.

 

In other jurisdictions you are meant to use Law 12C but the problem is that the 2NT bid is the illegal action, being a breach of Law 40C1, so you have to adjust according to Law 12B1, but without the infraction means the expectation after two passes. The only sensible way to deal with this is the English way, ie apply Law 12C1D.

[lamford]

south can work out that someone's at it. it only makes sense for it to be north, so i'd say no problem unless in a jurisdiction which treats fielding of psyches harshly.

 

obv now they've psyched 2nt twice it's in danger of becoming a partnership understanding, so if a 3rd time comes up i'd be inclined to adjust.

I think you are obliged to assume it is East who is "at it" until demonstrated conclusively otherwise. If you redouble, and partner bids 3♦ then your obligations have been met. Otherwise, the following applies:

"A player may deviate from his side's announced understandings always provided that his partner has no more reason to be aware of the deviation than have the opponents."

 

The failure to redouble here would, in I hope every jurisdiction, be treated as fielding, and classified as red in the EBU. It looks like a routine 3 IMPs to the non-offenders, or whatever the regulation is in the jurisdiction in question.

 

And I see I have posted just after Bluejak, with whose similar views I agree, although I think 9 IMPs is too much.

[helene_t]

I don't think South is under obligation to redouble. I wouldn't do it myself (ok, irelavant, I am not a peer of South who is reportedly an expert). But South might be content with 2NTx, maybe North can redouble, maybe North would take redbl as dogtail, maybe E would bid 3♦ if South redoubles.

[bluejak]

If you do not redouble then failure to double 3♠ is fielding, and disgracefully so.

[wank]

I think you are obliged to assume it is East who is "at it" until demonstrated conclusively otherwise. If you redouble, and partner bids 3♦ then your obligations have been met. Otherwise, the following applies:

"A player may deviate from his side's announced understandings always provided that his partner has no more reason to be aware of the deviation than have the opponents."

 

The failure to redouble here would, in I hope every jurisdiction, be treated as fielding, and classified as red in the EBU. It looks like a routine 3 IMPs to the non-offenders, or whatever the regulation is in the jurisdiction in question.

 

And I see I have posted just after Bluejak, with whose similar views I agree, although I think 9 IMPs is too much.

 

that's the ebu position, hence i edited my original comment to say i consider the ebu's stance to be harsh. i think mostly around the world, the partner of the psycher is allowed to try and work out what's going on when it's obvious that something's not right, and if he thinks the most likely culprit for the nonsensical nature of an auction is partner, he's allowed to take whatever action he sees fit, as long as that assessment isn't based on prior knowledge.

 

the ebu's position seems to assume prior knowledge whenever the partner of a psycher makes a successful judgement. there shouldn't be any need to make such an assumption though - we collect psyche forms (i don't know how these are handled, admittedly) so any prior knowledge should become evident.

 

as for why i think south can work out what's going on here, east is very unlikely to be making a psychic double as it will too often end the auction and result in a large number of doubled overtricks being scored up. this is presuming the double wasn't conventional.

[wank]

If you do not redouble then failure to double 3♠ is fielding, and disgracefully so.

 

there's no reference in the laws to fielding. it's an ebu term. the ebu treats these things in a different manner to most countries - think of fielding misbids.

[blackshoe]

The EBU's approach to fielding misbids has nothing to do with this case.

[billw55]

if he thinks the most likely culprit for the nonsensical nature of an auction is partner, he's allowed to take whatever action he sees fit, as long as that assessment isn't based on prior knowledge.

Perhaps, but in this case it evidently was based on prior knowledge.

 

And I see I have posted just after Bluejak, with whose similar views I agree, although I think 9 IMPs is too much.

I don't. Obvious CPU, obvious fielding, by players who obviously know better. Bringing the hammer down hard is 100% appropriate.

[Codo]

Yes no way for south to count his 8 HCPS with the expected 21 from partner and the penalty double from East with (here) 15 HCPS (surely minimum) and work out that someone psyched.

As Wank pointed out, If someone psyched, could it be a psyched penalty double of 2 NT? Did anybody in the world ever did that? Hardly. So, if you are a simple soul and count HCPS, who did psych?

 

Look at the hands: East double was NOT for the majors. It was penalty. Now south should act as if it was not despite the fact that nobody ever claimed that the X of 2 NT was conventional?

[RMB1]

The EBU's approach to fielding misbids has nothing to do with this case.

 

Because this case did not happen in EBU juristiction?

 

But the EBU approach to fielding misbid is the same as the approach to fielding psyches - a red fielded psyche is a finding that the original call was not a psyche but instead was a call which by parnership understanding has the disclosed meaning and some other meaning - a red fielded misbid is a finding that the original call was not a misbid but instead was a call which by parnership understanding has the disclosed meaning and some other meaning.

[aguahombre]

Do want you want to N/S.

 

East lost a chance to really nail N/S if he had passed and so did South. Can't get any redder than that.

 

East got busy and deserves what he got. Would he be complaining if South's HCP were held by North, instead? the double would presumably still be removed by West, because that is what he did.

[blackshoe]

This case is about a psych. Perhaps I should have said "the fact that the EBU approach to fielded misbids is the same as its approach to fielded psychs has nothing to do with this case".

[Trinidad]

Let me put it like this:

 

I psyche a 2NT opening. The opponents double and it turns out they have a misunderstanding and we get a good board for free. They do not fix their agreements.

 

If I see a second opportunity to psyche 2NT in the very same match, I would use it. This has nothing to do with a CPU with partner. It doesn't have anything to do with partnership understandings at all. It has something to do with exploiting a critical weakness in the opponents' bidding. I might even call 2NT "natural" in the sense of "the bid that has the best expected result without any special agreements with partner being necessary".

 

I would warn the opponents that if they don't fix this whole in their system right now, I might keep exploiting it.

 

Rik

[Sjoerds]

Does the pass of 3NT suggest South is allowing for the 2NT not to be natural, ie is he allowing for his partner not to have his bid? Of course it does: he had game values opposite a natural 2NT bid and took no positive action. Definitely fielded.

 

The pass of 2NT doubled looks as an easy game to me ;) .

On the pass of 3♠ he stated that he worked out that his partner must have psyched.

[bluejak]

there's no reference in the laws to fielding. it's an ebu term.

Sure, but that's just language. There is a reference to fielding in the Laws - read Laws 40A3 and 40C1 - but not the use of the word.

 

As for it being an EBU term, yes, the EBU has defined it. But many years of posting on RGB have convinced me it is also a term used in other countries, though - confusingly - with two different meanings.

 

There are plenty of words used in Laws matters - eg, in discussions here - which do not appear in the Laws.

[gnasher]

So what is [or might be] illegal?

...

What else? Fielding a psyche, ie a breach of Laws 40A3 and 40C1. The method of dealing with fielded psyches differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, which is one of the reason we ask OPs to state jurisdiction when asking questions.

 

Does the pass of 3NT suggest South is allowing for the 2NT not to be natural, ie is he allowing for his partner not to have his bid? Of course it does: he had game values opposite a natural 2NT bid and took no positive action. Definitely fielded.

There are lots of reasons that South might play for North to have psyched. If he did it because North psyches a lot, they have a CPU and have broken Laws 40A3 and 40C1.

 

If, on the other hand, South reasoned "We're losing the match; therefore partner is more likely than usual to have psyched; the odds favour playing for him to have psyched, so that's what I've going to do", there is no CPU - South is simply making a judgement of probabilities based upon the state of the match. If there is no CPU, no Law has been broken. You can call South's actions fielding if you like, but that doesn't make them, or the 2NT opening, illegal.

Edited October 30, 2012 by gnasher

[mycroft]

I would have told South that if 3♠ made, and I were called to report the [2nd] psychic, I would have adjusted the score to 3♠X= - and I'd be willing to take arguments about a pull to 4♦, but as with that hand both 3♠ and 4♦ could be going down, they'd better be good.

 

I am not sure I am adjusting the score - but I am ruling from the failure to either XX or double 3♠ that there's an undisclosed partnership understanding, and that South bid throughout based on it. Yes, E-W also know the evidence, but they did pretty well to handle it, it's just unlucky that the cards are such that N-S make whatever they bid.

 

Everybody's saying that the double of 2NT "clearly shows values", and exposes the psychic - I don't know why it would. Why couldn't East have North's hand, even without the ♣Q? I'd expect, if it were penalty, that it was penalty based on tricks, not big balanced; Simon's "Obviously, you have 15 points. Equally obviously, they are making 3NT" applies in spades to this one - East is going to be endplayed at Trick 1 (granted, so is North, but if South has the balance, he's probably getting his tricks before East does; and if West runs, or doubles a runout, we're in a world of hurt).

 

I remember giving up -400 in 1NTxx once - we had 25-27 high, so it seemed good. Doubler had ♠AKQJxxx and showed "strong NT values".

 

Trinidad's "I'll keep doing it if you can't patch it" turns it into a non-concealed partnership understanding. *If it's legal* in the event, then E-W is hosed. If not, then it's an illegal convention, and if used, will be punished as such.

 

So, with all the rambles, score stands, N/S PP for clearly making at least one call based on an undisclosed partnership understanding. Next hand please, and please report any further funny stuff, even if it turns out that it's all perfectly legal.

[Mbodell]

I don't really understand this thread. Who plays that immediate X of 2nt is penalty on values? Really? And if I hold a flattish 8 count I'm going to pass and hope we take a few overtricks in 2ntX worried that someone (maybe CHO) will take out a XX by me. My partner and I would not have discussed what XX of 2ntX with X as penalty, because who uses it for that and if they do how often does it come up (and if it does come up how certain is it that someone is psyching at the table - either the 2nt bidder or the Xer)?

 

The pass of 3♠ seems odd. I guess if East said that X shows "equal or better" penalty of 2nt, or even 15+ penalty, then South does know someone is faking. And North not doubling gives a slight clue that it is more likely to be East. But I think a X is called for.

[ahydra]

South might have fielded the psyche by not doubling 3S, but surely there's no damage because that just turns 400 into 1100? I'm more worried about whether he should redouble 2NT, but maybe that's conventional for them (e.g. I think South is entitled to believe partner might draw analogies to 1NTX auctions and bid 2C expecting a 5c suit opposite, for example).

 

Can we not class the X of 2NT as WoG? It's entirely plausible for North to hold two heart stops (A10xx) and have 9 tricks in the minors / pointy suits before East can knock both of these out. That hand is a clear double of 3NT, but not 2NT.

 

Every double of 2NT I've ever encountered has been for penalty. Yes it might make more sense to play it as two-suiter or something, but I would imagine there are plenty of national-level partnerships without such an agreement.

 

ahydra

[Cyberyeti]

South might have fielded the psyche by not doubling 3S, but surely there's no damage because that just turns 400 into 1100? I'm more worried about whether he should redouble 2NT, but maybe that's conventional for them (e.g. I think South is entitled to believe partner might draw analogies to 1NTX auctions and bid 2C expecting a 5c suit opposite, for example).

 

Can we not class the X of 2NT as WoG? It's entirely plausible for North to hold two heart stops (A10xx) and have 9 tricks in the minors / pointy suits before East can knock both of these out. That hand is a clear double of 3NT, but not 2NT.

 

Every double of 2NT I've ever encountered has been for penalty. Yes it might make more sense to play it as two-suiter or something, but I would imagine there are plenty of national-level partnerships without such an agreement.

 

ahydra

I have no issue with the X of 2N, it's a small gamble, but not stupid.

 

I have no issue with S not redoubling (would be artificial for us, not sure for NS), 2Nx=/+1 figures to be a nice gain anyway and is more likely to stay there than 2Nxx.

 

W's 3♠ smacks of a system misunderstanding as you really wouldn't want to move this and find partner has Xd off 6 cashing clubs, the SEWoG definition doesn't seem to deal with system misunderstanding, it appears W is assuming partner has shown some spades as would be shown over 1N.

 

Not doubling 3♠ does appear to be a field.