psyching against bad players

[Vampyr]

I found one aspect of the above confusing -- what is the ACBL's position about psyching a forcing bid?

[brettnj]

I agree with the director. Knowing that the opps were a weak pair, and did not have the ability "to field a psych", is not a demonstration of superiority, but weakness - doing it against a world-class pair, with the attendant risks, is fair game. However, psyching against weak pairs is the type of behavior that will drive newbies from the game. Since your level is demonstrably above those in question, you should rely upon your skill level to get an average plus board.

[awm]

1. Partner and I play a complex strong club system with many alerts. When we face a weaker pair are we expected to switch to SAYC? We would surely expect avg+ even if we did, and all the alerts might upset opponents...

2. Opponents have an auction to 4M and I think under leading an ace is probably best defense. If they are a weak pair, must I refrain from this lead? After all they might muff the play regardless, and beginners are taught never to underlead aces...

3. Opponents are a weak pair and have already misdefended my contract to give me an average plus. There's a squeeze available for me to get a field-wide top. Is it unethical to take advantage? After all I've already got avg+...

4. Opponents are announcing the meaning of their own calls at the table to help each other remember. Despite the clear UI, they are such bad players that they will probably give me good results. Is it unethical for me to call the director?

 

How are psychs different from the above?

[Caitlynne]

Psychic bids are part of the game. Sometimes they are intelligent based on the hand, and sometimes they are not. Against weak players - assuming you are a superior player - it is rarely helpful since you can expect to do well without relying on cunning tactics. But is it wrong?

 

NO! It is part of the game. The ACBL frowns on it because bad players are where the numbers are and does not want to chase them away.

 

On the other hand, why should your philosophical strategy about how to deal with a hand in an auction change because of your opponents's skill (a subjective perception/evaluation on your part, by the way)?

 

I might be able to beat pair X with an above average by playing down the middle, but feel I am likely to get a top vs. an average by psyching. If I am looking to win, might not I choose to take advantage of the opportunity before me? Don't we do this on every hand?

 

I say go ahead and psyche as long as you psyche within the rules (which includes not having an understanding about it with partner, which would constitute an unfair advantage).

 

By the way, I very very very rarely make random psychic bids, but I make tactical psyches whenever I have the right hand for it. This is fairly rare - maybe about once in every 300 deals or so - rare enough for partner not to recognize it and for no understanding to be established. What's more, I have a strict rule: partner is supposed to make his or her normal bid as if my bid were real. When I psyche, I am the one who has to be responsible for the psyche, not partner.

 

Finally, it is not only weak players who object to psychics. But anyone who is truly an expert with an expert understanding of the game will not have a problem with it.

[LinusO]

I am against psyching against new players, because it might scare away new players if more experienced players psych against them. The new players might feel cheated.

[billw55]

psyching against weak pairs is the type of behavior that will drive newbies from the game. Since your level is demonstrably above those in question, you should rely upon your skill level to get an average plus board.

I am against psyching against new players, because it might scare away new players if more experienced players psych against them.

At club games I would agree. Maybe even at entry level tournaments where novices may be tentatively wetting their feet, so to speak.

 

However this case was specified as occurring at a national tournament. Far from dabbing their toes, they dove in the deep end of their own will. So special treatment is no longer warranted IMO.

 

 

 

[blackshoe]

Oakie went on an anti-psyching crusade. I don't know why he did it, and I don't much care. I think he did a disservice to the game.

[hrothgar]

 

Against weak players - assuming you are a superior player - it is rarely helpful since you can expect to do well without relying on cunning tactics.

 

In my experience, a successful well time psyche can throw players game off for an entire match.

Especially when they get really wound up and then get no satisfaction from the TD...

[blackshoe]

I found one aspect of the above confusing -- what is the ACBL's position about psyching a forcing bid?

They don't, so far as I know, have one. It is, however, illegal to psych certain artificial or conventional bids, and illegal to have in place a psychic control if someone psychs.

 

ACBL GCC, under "Dissallowed":

2. Psyching of artificial or conventional opening bids and/or conventional responses thereto. Psyching conventional suit responses, which are less than 2NT, to natural openings.

3. Psychic controls (Includes ANY partnership agreement which, if used in conjunction with a psychic call, makes allowance for that psych.)

[rubedog]

This is a why it's important to ask the range if opp doesn't say it. If opp asked the range and your P responds 15-17 he would know 2♣ is stayman. if he asked the range, you would have had to be truthful and say it was a weak NT. or at the beginning of the hand, you should notify that you play weak NT openings. If i called the director and said your P didn't state the NT range and it wasn't standard 15-18 or so, yes, the director is totally in the right to deny your bid and penalize you somehow.

[rubedog]

Since you said you bid the psych against inexperience players. This is directly from the ACBL website: Unsportsmanlike Psychic Bidding — Action apparently designed to give the opponents an abnormal opportunity to get a good score, psychs against pairs or teams in contention, psychs against inexperienced players and psychs used merely to create action at the table are examples of unsportsmanlike psychic bidding. Many directors would have called you out for stating a strong NT bid and passing on 2♣.

[mikestar13]

Read S.J. Simon's Why You lose at Bridge. the chapter "Fixed by Palookas" is on point for this discussion--psyching against weak players is self-defeating. But how can you know someone you are playing against in a national event is a bad player until you've seen them in action? The OP doesn't describe a situation where the opponents definitively showed themselves to be unskilled on board one so he threw a psyche at them on board two: he estimated their actual skill higher than it was and tried to psyche them, reasonably enough. Were I director, I might consider advising them to be grateful for the complement (undeserved, though I wouldn't say that).

[ggwhiz]

I'm fine with this contingent on the level of the event but it brings back a fond memory.

 

I volunteered to play with the novice girlfriend of our club Director when he told me that a number of players were taking advantage of her in the bidding.

 

We had 2 rules. Pass - pass to her and she MUST bid and if I took any bid during the auction she could not pass the opponents out in anything unless they were doubled. We put fear and loathing into the hearts of some really bad actors and one of them called her on a psyche on the 2nd last board. The Director (not her boyfriend) ruled the result stood and told her she was only allowed to psyche once more in this session (and she did).

 

A few days later playing with her boyfriend against me, I made an overcall and when he bid something she doubled him!

[hrothgar]

Read S.J. Simon's Why You lose at Bridge. the chapter "Fixed by Palookas" is on point for this discussion--psyching against weak players is self-defeating.

 

I disagree. Simon's analysis focuses on the cost benefit analysis for a single hand. In actuality, the effects of a successful psyche can persist for years.

 

Case in point: I haven't made a psyche during a F2F ACBL tournament in at least six months. (And I've played in a half dozen or so events)

I guarantee you that when I sit down to play in Watertown next month, there will be a couple individuals who will get all wound up when they sit against me and this will throw off their game.

[blackshoe]

This is a why it's important to ask the range if opp doesn't say it. If opp asked the range and your P responds 15-17 he would know 2♣ is stayman. if he asked the range, you would have had to be truthful and say it was a weak NT. or at the beginning of the hand, you should notify that you play weak NT openings. If i called the director and said your P didn't state the NT range and it wasn't standard 15-18 or so, yes, the director is totally in the right to deny your bid and penalize you somehow.

One incident should not result in any penalty. As for "deny your bid", what does that mean? The director cannot tell a player "you can't make that bid, do something else".

[Phil]

Oakie went on an anti-psyching crusade. I don't know why he did it, and I don't much care. I think he did a disservice to the game.

 

Indeed. I've heard this diatribe before and there are players to this day that accept this as Gospel.

 

I never played against Oakie but I'm pretty sure he was west-coast based. Would have fun to psyche against him.

[vmsmith]

Psyching is best done against strong opposition. They are easy to mess with because they play a plethora of conventions which keep their hands tied.

 

If one studies the subject there are some really good books on the subject. They were self published but can be found but are very expensive.

[from_mars]

Good Players don't need to psych against bad players to win. Furthermore, psychs tend to harm the enjoyment of the game for lesser ranked players. Without lower ranking players there are no higher ranked players. So why push the lower ranked players out of the game by hurting their enjoyment of the game? Yes, psyching is legal and part of the game, but it is not the smart thing to do for the long term benefit of the game.

[hrothgar]

Good Players don't need to psych against bad players to win. Furthermore, psychs tend to harm the enjoyment of the game for lesser ranked players. Without lower ranking players there are no higher ranked players. So why push the lower ranked players out of the game by hurting their enjoyment of the game? Yes, psyching is legal and part of the game, but it is not the smart thing to do for the long term benefit of the game.

 

If the special little snowflakes are so fragile that they can't cope with a psyche, then they aren't long for the game...

I think that its a lot better if players a taught from early that this is a legitimate and legal part of the game and nothing for them to get upset about.

 

Somehow poker players are able to deal with (and even admire) bluffing.

Psyches in bridge are no different and if players can't deal with it, the issue is with them rather than the one making a legal call.

[billw55]

If the special little snowflakes are so fragile that they can't cope with a psyche, then they aren't long for the game...

I think that its a lot better if players a taught from early that this is a legitimate and legal part of the game and nothing for them to get upset about.

I agree. But I also realize that these fragile snowflakes make up a significant portion of players, supporting NBOs with their dues, and supporting clubs with their card fees. I think that some accommodations in certain settings would be considerate. No, not in a national tournament. But I do want to remember that driving them out of the game ultimately hurts all of us.

[helene_t]

I learned psyches from the very start when I started learning bridge. And I have seen psyches being discussed and even sometimes recommended in the intermediate-level section of the Dutch BF magazine. So I would say that surely players who attend national events should be familiar with the concept.

[tfoerster]

Why would you want to? Why give weak opps a chance with a psych that may backfire, when you are much more likely to beat them on skill?

 

And, if you psych only against weak opps and your partner knows it, then your partner has unauthorized information. (Unless of course you tell your opps that you consider them weak and therefore will be psyching more than typical against them.)

[Zelandakh]

Why would you want to? Why give weak opps a chance with a psych that may backfire, when you are much more likely to beat them on skill?

 

And, if you psych only against weak opps and your partner knows it, then your partner has unauthorized information. (Unless of course you tell your opps that you consider them weak and therefore will be psyching more than typical against them.)

The OP at no point suggested that he only psyches against weak pairs, only that he considers them just as much fair game for the tactic as advanced players, at least within this context. Knowing how and when to psyche is itself a bridge skill and clearly one that the OP feels is not only beneficial to his game but also either increases the likelihood of beating those opps or increases the amount of the win. If you felt certain there was a legitimate and legal tactic you could use in a national competition that would improve your score, would you choose not to use it because someone else (me for example) told you they did not think it was a successful strategy?

[tfoerster]

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.

Did you have a Stayman bid?

[jodepp]

I'm a bit surprised that nobody - so far - has spoken for the side that was psyched against.

 

The argument that 'it was a national event' does carry weight, a position I have taught learning players in an effort to prepare them for 'playing up'. However, given the state of our game I wonder how many people would say psyching here was forgivable if the other pair decided to give up the game as a result.

 

Playing this game as competitively as we do, I think it's hard to 'shift gears' and put ourselves in the shoes of much less experienced pairs. Many such pairs - not all, true - feel embarrassed when a psych works against them and they get frustrated. Rather than work to build their bridge skills, they take the view - understandably IMO - that they'd rather spend their leisure time doing something else than getting embarrassed by what they think - rightfully or not - are 'sharp practices'.

 

Many former students of mine confess to getting irked because of psyches, and a few have given up the game for this reason. So, before we all blindly support such actions, let's be sure to consider the health of the game at large before we say 'yea' or 'nay' here.