psyching against bad players

[wank]

i psyched against a bad pair. obviously this was legal and the director told them so. later he unofficially suggested i behave myself and that psyching against clueless people was a bit low. i have heard this view expressed before.

 

it's not a view i share. this was a national event, albeit not a very high standard one (it was a swiss running alongside a BAM, so all the good teams were in the BAM assuming they had qualified for the final). the opps were the perennial beginner types - played for a very long time without ever progressing. but anyway, i consider psyching to be an important part of the game. yes, it's very out of fashion compared to the early days of bridge (1930s and whatnot), but I don't think bidding fashion should be a factor in deciding how i play the game.

 

comments?

 

please don't send this to the laws forum. there is no doubt my actions were legal. it's an issue of taste.

[mgoetze]

I would unofficially suggest to the director that the EBU behave itself, and that dropping the teams that didn't qualify for the PAB finals into the Swiss in such a way that they were doomed to play against the bottom of that field was a bit low.

[eagles123]

imo at a national event anything goes, if the opps don't like it they shouldn't be playing in such events

[helene_t]

I think it is ok. I wouldn't go so far as to say that "anything goes", but psyching is part of the game.

 

There could be an issue with certain "baby psyches" which are expected by stronger players and but not weaker ones. If it is GBK at your level but not at opps' then maybe one could argue that it is a CPU.

[wank]

 

There could be an issue with certain "baby psyches" which are expected by stronger players and but not weaker ones. If it is GBK at your level but not at opps' then maybe one could argue that it is a CPU.

 

this was sort of an issue here. i opened a strong NT and passed stayman which is a pretty pathetic effort really. when the director came, the opp accused my partner of fielding the psyche. he being a good player, obviously pointed out that i had exposed it myself by passing stayman. this was beyond the opp who hadn't made any such connection.

[helene_t]

I don't think you have an obligation to explain to opps that passing stayman exposes a psyche. As long as psyching a strong NT is not a priori expected in your partnership then you are ok.

 

I was more thinking about bids like

 

3♣-(pass)-3NT which are understood by better players just to say "I am happy to play 3NT undoubled" while weaker players may assume that it promises values.

[hrothgar]

I don't see anything wrong with requesting that I don't psyche against bad players.

 

All that I ask in return is some way that I can identify said bad players. Perhaps we can segregate them all into one section or, alternatively, make anyone who asks for such protection wear a large scarlet "B" on their clothing...

[Jinksy]

I have much more of a problem with the clueless club players who go to such events and then try to tell their opps the rules of the game.

 

Against you it wasn't an issue, because you obviously knew where you stood, and on the off chance they were entirely pleasant about it and just called the director to make sure, then kudos to them. But my guess is what actually happened is they got a bit flustered, started accusing you of cheating and either called the director to punish you or you called him to resolve their complaint properly - because that's how 98% of these disputes seem to go. If so, I'd say the director had an unofficial word with the wrong player.

[Vampyr]

Is it wise, though, to psyche against weak players? You expect to do well against them anyway;

[paulg]

imo at a national event anything goes, if the opps don't like it they shouldn't be playing in such events

Seeing as the numbers for this event have plummetted, it looks like most have decided not to. I don't think this is due to psyching by the stronger players, but I guess it will not be an issue next year.

[rhm]

.... psyching is part of the game.

This is the heart of the matter. If it is part of the game, there is no reason for all this frowning and moralizing.

In fact it is perfectly okay for you to judge whether a certain psyche is likely to succeed against the opponents you are playing against before deciding what to do.

When I execute say a double guard squeeze I also do not make sure that my opponents will understand what is going on.

I could not care less

 

Rainer Herrmann

[billw55]

imo at a national event anything goes, if the opps don't like it they shouldn't be playing in such events

Is it wise, though, to psyche against weak players? You expect to do well against them anyway;

Agree with both.

[Vampyr]

Agree with both.

 

Give us an upvote then! B-)

[billw55]

OK then http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif merry Christmas

[mycroft]

Jinksy: "If so, I'd say the director had an unofficial word with the wrong player."

 

I have, on occasion, given "unofficial words" with both sides of such a situation (and other cases where skill level differences are large and cause "misunderstandings"). Of course, each side wouldn't see the discussion with the other side...

 

I have heard players, in similar situations asking if the psycher was proud of how they bamboozled the LNs? I wouldn't do that as a director, and I'm not sure I am happy with it happening, but from those doing it, the point gets across.

 

I think the best answer on this case is Vampyr's; otherwise known as "why would you randomize your results when you're booked for +2/board playing normally?"

 

Unfortunately, the most common answer - and I am NOT saying this applied in the OP case - is that the experienced players were drunk, or didn't care any more, and were having "fun" at the LN's expense. Happened to me in Chicago - our opponents for the last round thought they had been allowed to withdraw. When they were rousted out of the bar, they sat and played 7 of the frankly, most enjoyable hands of bridge I'd seen. But all their screwing around WORKED, and a team that probably would have beat us by 10 playing straight up won by 45. Even though it was fun; even though I knew what was going on; even though my team had the same zero chance of making day 2; it still hurt - and it still hurt that we could get crushed by players who were throwing cards because they were so much better than us (and got incredibly lucky).

 

And I'm sure I've done the same thing in my time at some time.

[Cyberyeti]

Is it wise, though, to psyche against weak players? You expect to do well against them anyway;

 

True, but the last time I was seriously tempted, I was playing as a guest with a club member. Opps were a pair of lols, and as we sat down, one said to the other "Watch out for <partner's name>, he psyches", unfortunately I got dealt bona fide bids on both boards.

[kenrexford]

Is it wise, though, to psyche against weak players? You expect to do well against them anyway;

Actually, the very high risk against bad players is to get averages when the field gets tops. You almost have to leave some tables with 75% to stay par. A psychic turning an average plus to a top is a hedge against the wall of 4H making 10 tricks on the first board.

[gszes]

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH DON'T advertise this too much or we will suddenly have some sort of "politically correct" police suddenly throwing anyone that psyches in jail since they are obviously treating their opponents with disrespect. I say this as someone that rarely psyches but still find it useful on occasion.

[Phil]

Actually, the very high risk against bad players is to get averages when the field gets tops. You almost have to leave some tables with 75% to stay par. A psychic turning an average plus to a top is a hedge against the wall of 4H making 10 tricks on the first board.

 

The field isn't getting tops against bunnies by psyching. They are just playing bridge and letting things fall into their laps.

 

I suppose if you knew that the board you were about to play was ridiculously straightforward then you might step out but it might backfire too.

 

My favorite kind of opponent to psyche against is someone good but not great. They can't untangle a phony 1N overcall or other assorted fun.

 

I also like to psyche against people I loathe and my record in this area is pretty good.

[helene_t]

Against very weak players who don't understand, let alone make use of, the meaning of your calls, psyching serves no purpose. For example, if they bid the same way against a preempt as against a strong 2♣ opening, there is no point in opening 2♣ with a weak hand.

[rhm]

Against very weak players who don't understand, let alone make use of, the meaning of your calls, psyching serves no purpose. For example, if they bid the same way against a preempt as against a strong 2♣ opening, there is no point in opening 2♣ with a weak hand.

It depends on the circumstances:

 

For example yesterday playing with a weak partner in a weak field

 

I held as South (IMPS pairs):

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s987532h92d96cjt3&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=p1d]133|200[/hv]

I decided to bid 1♠ whereupon next hand bid 4♥ and 12 tricks were (almost) cold.

I would not have passed against any pair, but my action might differ depending on the skill level of the opponents. Overall few pairs bid as well when faced with intervention.

 

Rainer Herrmann.

[WellSpyder]

... unfortunately I got dealt bona fide bids on both boards.

Couldn't you have psyched a pass, then?

[PhilG007]

i psyched against a bad pair. obviously this was legal and the director told them so. later he unofficially suggested i behave myself and that psyching against clueless people was a bit low. i have heard this view expressed before.

 

it's not a view i share. this was a national event, albeit not a very high standard one (it was a swiss running alongside a BAM, so all the good teams were in the BAM assuming they had qualified for the final). the opps were the perennial beginner types - played for a very long time without ever progressing. but anyway, i consider psyching to be an important part of the game. yes, it's very out of fashion compared to the early days of bridge (1930s and whatnot), but I don't think bidding fashion should be a factor in deciding how i play the game.

 

comments?

 

please don't send this to the laws forum. there is no doubt my actions were legal. it's an issue of taste.

 

The issue of 'psyching' at the bridge table has long been a bone of contention. The ACBL,particularly has taken a dim view of it.

I quote the article about it in the ACBL Bulletin in February 1978 authored by Donald Oakie :-

 

"[ It is high time that we call all of our members' and directors attention,especially at the club level, to the fact that,

while a psychic bid is legal,its discriminate use is not. People who employ psychic bids against less experienced players may be

guilty of unsportsmanlike psyching and thereby be in violation of League regulations. People who psych against their peers may be guilty

of frivolous psyching.or of having an unannounced partnership understanding. People who psych against more experienced players will probably

get bad boards,and they may lose the few good boards they get by being judged to have indulged in unsportsmanlike psyching or to have disrupted the game.

 

 

"What does this mean to you as a player? If you want to psych any call other than a forcing call,go ahead and do it - it's perfectly legal. If you psych

on an average of once a month.no player or director is likely to say a word about it.If you can't resist the temptation to do it oftener,you are going to

fall foul of the Laws and League regulations. The excitement of using a psychic bid often exerts an almost irresistible attraction for a newcomer to

duplicate bridge. An occasional jaded 'duplicateer' will fall back on psychic bids as a means of having "fun" during a session marked by bad results

in the early rounds or where few rating points are at stake. Expert players and the large majority of experienced club and tournament players seldom or

never make a psychic bid.

" A psychic bid carries a high price tag. When employed agaianst one's peers,the chances of success are 50-50. When they fail,they can prove to be very

costly.When they succeed,in a very short time the cost in partnership confidence can far exceed any momentary advantage gained.

By its nature,a psychic bid,whether successful or not,is remembered by the opponents as well as the user's partner. A player who becomes addicted to

psychs soon becomes a 'marked' man. Psychers live in a storm's eye of gloating or infuriated opponents,harried TD's and sceptical tournament committess.

Win or lose,they,as like as not,tend to disrupt the events they enter and thus find the protection extended to them by the Laws offset by their inability to prove that,by their action,they have not violated the Proprieties"

[hrothgar]

The issue of 'psyching' at the bridge table has long been a bone of contention. The ACBL,particularly has taken a dim view of it.

I quote the article about it in the ACBL Bulletin in February 1978 authored by Donald Oakie :-

 

"[ It is high time that we call all of our members' and directors attention,especially at the club level, to the fact that,

while a psychic bid is legal,its discriminate use is not. People who employ psychic bids against less experienced players may be

guilty of unsportsmanlike psyching and thereby be in violation of League regulations. People who psych against their peers may be guilty

of frivolous psyching.or of having an unannounced partnership understanding. People who psych against more experienced players will probably

get bad boards,and they may lose the few good boards they get by being judged to have indulged in unsportsmanlike psyching or to have disrupted the game.

 

"What does this mean to you as a player? If you want to psych any call other than a forcing call,go ahead and do it - it's perfectly legal. If you psych

on an average of once a month.no player or director is likely to say a word about it.If you can't resist the temptation to do it oftener,you are going to

fall foul of the Laws and League regulations. The excitement of using a psychic bid often exerts an almost irresistible attraction for a newcomer to

duplicate bridge. An occasional jaded 'duplicateer' will fall back on psychic bids as a means of having "fun" during a session marked by bad results

in the early rounds or where few rating points are at stake. Expert players and the large majority of experienced club and tournament players seldom or

never make a psychic bid.

" A psychic bid carries a high price tag. When employed agaianst one's peers,the chances of success are 50-50. When they fail,they can prove to be very

costly.When they succeed,in a very short time the cost in partnership confidence can far exceed any momentary advantage gained.

By its nature,a psychic bid,whether successful or not,is remembered by the opponents as well as the user's partner. A player who becomes addicted to

psychs soon becomes a 'marked' man. Psychers live in a storm's eye of gloating or infuriated opponents,harried TD's and sceptical tournament committess.

Win or lose,they,as like as not,tend to disrupt the events they enter and thus find the protection extended to them by the Laws offset by their inability to prove that,by their action,they have not violated the Proprieties"

 

Good thing none of this has any regulatory impact...

[zillahandp]

The issue is not the psyche itself but if it is fielded or semi fielded. If you psyche even from time to time, your p could well be compromised as he knows you psche from time to time. For this reason all psyche bids or even semi psches must be reported. The director should and will rule against the par psching wherever possible and so a smidgeon of fieldng will label your p a cheat and possbly you as a bot too sharp. Its your risk and the odds are not good esp agains a pair you expect to better anyway. Daft tactic for my money. Not suprised you got ticked off on the basis it was a bit pointless.