Psych or not

[Free]

Is opening 1♠ with AKxx-AQJxxx-xx-x considered a psych or not?

 

EDIT: suppose sayc or a similar natural system, not canapé :rolleyes:

EDIT: since many people read too much into this, this hand is a theoretical case and 1♠ is deliberate, not a misbid or a wrong sorting of cards. The question is if this bid on it's own is a psych or not, any possible result or adjustment doesn't matter, but the labeling is what it's all about.

[TylerE]

Well, I'm voting not a psyche, since you didn't specify system. In one I played this actually would be a systemic 1♠ opener. A canape' system, obviously, but a GCC legal one...

[aguahombre]

Misbid, or misguided, would be my guess. I am not sure why we would care whether it is labeled a psyche. If partner somehow figures out what has happened, we might have to address EI, UI, or CPU; but, I don't think what we call the 1S opening matters.

[Cyberyeti]

Misbid, or misguided, would be my guess. I am not sure why we would care whether it is labeled a psyche. If partner somehow figures out what has happened, we might have to address EI, UI, or CPU; but, I don't think what we call the 1S opening matters.

It matters in a jurisdiction that takes a dim view of psyche opposite psyche.

[aguahombre]

It matters in a jurisdiction that takes a dim view of psyche opposite psyche.

Are you saying that jurisdiction would not take a dim view here if they didn't call the opening bid a psyche?

[jnichols]

It's a gross distortion of length (more than one card) so I vote psyche

[fromageGB]

You have a genuine spade suit, you have an opening hand. In normal methods it is therefore not a psyche, but a misleading distortion. I think this demonstrates that it is impossible to draw a non-arbitrary boundary between a psyche and a distortion, or adjustment.

 

Playing a 15/16 1NT, if I downgrade a 15 count because of my feeling on the nature and position of honours and other high cards, and open 1♣, I don't think anyone would bat an eyelid. Upgrading a 14 to open 1NT similarly, but "I" am sure 10 would be a psyche. But I would not like to draw a hard line.

[aguahombre]

It's a gross distortion of length (more than one card) so I vote psyche

?? In what natural system is a 1S opening with 4 of them a distortion of more than one card in that suit? The issue is not bidding the 6-card heart suit, and I don't think Opener has psyched (yet).

[barmar]

?? In what natural system is a 1S opening with 4 of them a distortion of more than one card in that suit? The issue is not bidding the 6-card heart suit, and I don't think Opener has psyched (yet).

They've made multiple distortions.

 

The normal meaning of 1♠ is that spades are at least 5 cards long, and no other suit is longer. But in this instance the spades are 1 card shorter than promised, and there's another suit that's 2 cards longer than the spades.

 

Neither of these by itself is a gross distortion. But two medium distortions together can add up to a gross distortion.

[Free]

Misbid, or misguided, would be my guess. I am not sure why we would care whether it is labeled a psyche. If partner somehow figures out what has happened, we might have to address EI, UI, or CPU; but, I don't think what we call the 1S opening matters.

This hand didn't actually occur, so we can't call it a misbid and we don't need a ruling. This hand came up in a discussion about psychs and this hand caused some disagreement. So suppose the player deliberately opens 1♠ thinking it's the best option.

 

The point of this poll is to determine if this is a psych or not. So we actually do care whether it is labeled a psych or not. ;)

[campboy]

If you think this is only one card out, what is AKxx, AQJxx, xx, xx? These hands are certainly not the same distance from a 1♠ opening.

 

I think it's a gross distortion as you're describing the hand as having no suit longer than spades when it has a suit 2 cards longer than spades. But perhaps that's only because I come from a jurisdiction where everything must be either "gross" or "minor".

[Cyberyeti]

Are you saying that jurisdiction would not take a dim view here if they didn't call the opening bid a psyche?

If it's not a psyche (or misbid), it can't be fielded.

 

If the bid opposite is a psyche, if this is not considered a psyche, then that other psyche is dealt with on its merits, if this is considered a psyche, psyche opposite psyche is often just routinely adjusted.

[TylerE]

If you think this is only one card out, what is AKxx, AQJxx, xx, xx? These hands are certainly not the same distance from a 1♠ opening.

 

I think it's a gross distortion as you're describing the hand as having no suit longer than spades when it has a suit 2 cards longer than spades. But perhaps that's only because I come from a jurisdiction where everything must be either "gross" or "minor".

 

Since when can you have "no suit longer"? In many places opening 1M with e.g. 5♠-6♦ or especially 5♥-6♦ would be considered routine, especially for more minimum hands. Likewise in some systems it's nessesary to open 1♦ holding, for instance, 4 good diamonds and 6 bad clubs.

[campboy]

Since when can you have "no suit longer"? In many places opening 1M with e.g. 5♠-6♦ or especially 5♥-6♦ would be considered routine, especially for more minimum hands. Likewise in some systems it's nessesary to open 1♦ holding, for instance, 4 good diamonds and 6 bad clubs.

Sure, if by partnership agreement you open 1♠ with 56xx then this is just a deviation.

[barmar]

Since when can you have "no suit longer"? In many places opening 1M with e.g. 5♠-6♦ or especially 5♥-6♦ would be considered routine, especially for more minimum hands. Likewise in some systems it's nessesary to open 1♦ holding, for instance, 4 good diamonds and 6 bad clubs.

But we're not talking about "some system". The condition given was SAYC and similar natural systems.

 

Yes, sometimes people deviate, particular with 5♥6m because they don't want to reverse, or if the ♥ suit quality is much better.

 

If you want to get more specific, 1♠ practically guarantees that spades are at least as long as hearts in most natural systems. That's enough for this discussion.

[LghtnngRod]

I voted not a psych, but it is close to being borderline :)

 

My reasoning:

Is it a distortion? Yes

Is it a gross distortion? Certainly, it makes me want to vomit.

Is it a deliberate distortion? Now this is where it gets murky. Whatever tortuous logic the bidder had in mind I doubt it was his intention to mislead.

[Finch]

If it's not a psyche (or misbid), it can't be fielded.

 

If the bid opposite is a psyche, if this is not considered a psyche, then that other psyche is dealt with on its merits, if this is considered a psyche, psyche opposite psyche is often just routinely adjusted.

 

No, psyche opposite psyche is not 'routinely adjusted' it is an alert to the TD to have a look at the hand.

I've seen psyche opposite psyche hands where both of them have been obvious positions to do something amusing and no-one has thought any more of it.

 

I agree with an earlier poster: while psyching is legal, who cares if this is labelled a 'psyche' or isn't?

[Finch]

If it's not a psyche (or misbid), it can't be fielded.

 

This is also just playing with terminology.

 

If you claim to be playing SAYC or some other 'standard' system, and you open 1S on this hand, and later bid hearts, and partner does not give preference back to spades with (e.g.) 3 spades and 1 heart, then there is certainly evidence of a concealed partnership understanding.

 

What so many posters don't seem to realise is that what you call things isn't the point, it's whether your partner is as surprised about your hand as opponents.

[campboy]

Is it a deliberate distortion? Now this is where it gets murky. Whatever tortuous logic the bidder had in mind I doubt it was his intention to mislead.

I think you're making a distinction that is not in the lawbook definition, which says nothing about trying to mislead. IMO so long as he knew bidding 1♠ was a distortion and chose to bid it anyway it is a deliberate distortion, whatever his motivation.

[Cyberyeti]

No, psyche opposite psyche is not 'routinely adjusted' it is an alert to the TD to have a look at the hand.

I've seen psyche opposite psyche hands where both of them have been obvious positions to do something amusing and no-one has thought any more of it.

 

I agree with an earlier poster: while psyching is legal, who cares if this is labelled a 'psyche' or isn't?

 

I'm not saying it should be, I'm saying that particularly in clubs it IS routinely adjusted.

[helene_t]

I voted psyche but unless the player said that he deliberately deviated from his system I would think of a more plausible explanation since I cannot phantom a reason for making such a call that only serves to mislead partner. It's not like you want to deter a spade lead.

 

Probably just a misbid.

[gnasher]

What so many posters don't seem to realise is that what you call things isn't the point, it's whether your partner is as surprised about your hand as opponents.

Although the EBU's rules imply that the point is what your partner actually does.

[RMB1]

I'm not saying it should be, I'm saying that particularly in clubs it IS routinely adjusted.

 

In some clubs perhaps but I do find this statement incredible.

 

I have never seen a ruling in a club where both members of a partnership have psyched on the same board. I think there must be few clubs where such rulings (leading to an adjustment or not) can be routine.

[Cyberyeti]

In some clubs perhaps but I do find this statement incredible.

 

I have never seen a ruling in a club where both members of a partnership have psyched on the same board. I think there must be few clubs where such rulings (leading to an adjustment or not) can be routine.

In Norfolk, if a pair against you psyche, you can commit pretty much any UI atrocity and it will be ruled in your favour. If both opponents psyche, they will be ruled against provided the director doesn't spontaneously combust first.

 

Example:- Partner, the absent minded type passed a 14 count. RHO opened 1♠ I overcalled 2♥ with Jxxxx and a 5 count, P-P-X-P-P-P. The defence fail to lead trumps several times and I make 4 or 5 trump tricks opposite Ax scoring 2♥X= when it should be -3. Director's ruling psyche opposite psyche so must adjust.

 

This was possibly the worst TD ruling ever since he adjusted to 2H=, but to give him some credit I suspect he knew that this was sufficient to still give us a 20-0 VP win.

[LghtnngRod]

I think you're making a distinction that is not in the lawbook definition, which says nothing about trying to mislead. IMO so long as he knew bidding 1♠ was a distortion and chose to bid it anyway it is a deliberate distortion, whatever his motivation.

What possible alternative motive might a player have to make a deliberate gross distortion if not to mislead? If (as I suggest) there is no alternative motive then the absence of its being expressly required in the laws is not in my view a significant omission.