PSYCHED OUT - A BRIDGE FAIRY TALE

[jogs]

I have had a read of Larry Cohen's link to which you refer, and it does not seem to support a ban on psyching. It is mainly an observation that for the most part psyching is a losing strategy. That is not an argument for banning psyching. If anything it is an argument for encouraging its proliferation, provided not conducted by oneself or one's partner.

 

Personally I am pleased that banning it remains a minority view. In the few events that I have seen where a ban is illegally imposed (ie Acol club tourneys on BBO), the incompetent policing of that ban raises more problems that the act of psyching ever could have done.

 

I do favor a ban on psyching. If you want to psych, play poker.

It is relatively easy to field psyches by partner. But when

your side psyches both opponents must field the psych to

survive the board. Also fielding psyches often creates a

BIT.

If there were a rule that the psyching pair is not entitled

to protection, then I would agree to allowing psyches. Meaning

if your side psyches, their side is allowed to bid whatever they

like even if there is a BIT.

[hrothgar]

I do favor a ban on psyching. If you want to psych, play poker.

 

If you don't want to face psyches, go play hearts...

 

You might not like this, but your personal aesthetics don't trump the rules of the game

[Vampyr]

If psyches were made illegal, what would happen to misbids? Or even poor bids?

[the hog]

As Jack points out, L. Cohen does not suggest a ban on psychic bidding at all, far from it. He states HE does not psyche. I suggest you read his article again. Do you also want to ban pre emptive bids because they make life difficult for players? When I was a little tacker many years ago I played many times against a very strong pair who frequently used the following sequence (3?) P (3NT) on minimal values and a fit. Do you regard this as a psyche? It is not. 3NT undoubled nv vs vul is the optimum place to play a contract. Even -450 as against -620 will gain Imps for you. The first couple of times this caught me unaware but you learn to live and deal with it.

[mike777]

As Jack points out, L. Cohen does not suggest a ban on psychic bidding at all, far from it. He states HE does not psyche. I suggest you read his article again. Do you also want to ban pre emptive bids because they make life difficult for players? When I was a little tacker many years ago I played many times against a very strong pair who frequently used the following sequence (3?) P (3NT) on minimal values and a fit. Do you regard this as a psyche? It is not. 3NT undoubled nv vs vul is the optimum place to play a contract. Even -450 as against -620 will gain Imps for you. The first couple of times this caught me unaware but you learn to live and deal with it.

 

 

welcome Hog,,,,,you are missed.

 

 

regarding pysches you seem to miss or think your main point is not important.

 

 

I dont have a better answer. The result is that many perhaps more than most acbl player leave bridge...this is one of many ...I dont have a good answer but it does piss off players below the median ACBL master point list.....

[jogs]

If you don't want to face psyches, go play hearts...

 

You might not like this, but your personal aesthetics don't trump the rules of the game

I care less, if opponents psyche. In America, most of the new players are over fifty.

They can't handle psyches. One bad experience may make them give up the game.

The ACBL needs new players more than new players need the ACBL.

 

A compromise would make psyches is mid-chart treatment. Expert players should be able

to deal with psyches. The masses would never see one at the table.

 

Also a psyche is a bid to deceive. Pre-empts are not psyches. Neither are bids

which may be undervalued(in the opinion of opponents).

[hrothgar]

 

A compromise would make psyches is mid-chart treatment. Expert players should be able

to deal with psyches. The masses would never see one at the table.

 

 

I'll stick with the Laws of the game as they are written (especially since the number of Midcharts events is effectively zero)

[hrothgar]

Also a psyche is a bid to deceive.

 

And why do I care about this?

[wank]

if players are put off by psyches it's the fault of those teaching them the game who leave them unprepared or unaware. as i wrote here previously, a director at a national EBU event had a word with me to suggest i shouldn't have psyched against my previous opponents. this was an attitude i disagreed with entirely. if the opps thought this underhand, it's the job of the ebu or other authorities to disabuse them of this notion.

[1eyedjack]

It is my observation that there is a strong correlation between those who express aggravation at successful opposition psychs and those who adopt a sanctimonious smug glow of self-righteous gloating when the opposition psych (more frequently) fails. In that context I find it slightly surprising that they are so keen to have them banned.

[billw55]

The whole concept of seeking rectification here baffles me. I would be happy to have learned something useful from a stronger pair.

 

ACBL is already a "safe space" type organizer, what with all the system restrictions. How far does it need to go?

[glen]

How far does it need to go?

Clearly it must extend to "falsecards". Can you imagine that dishonesty is allowed during play?

[Vampyr]

What's the OP and ever inexperienced player needs to realise is that people generally psyche maybe once a year, twice tops (probably even including "baby psyches") and some explicitly do not psyche at all. So it's not as if the game were being overrun by psyches; in the vast majority of sessions, you will not encounter one at all. Basically, it's not worth worrying about, except to be sure that you can handle (1♥)-X-(1♠) and the like.

[billw55]

What's the OP and ever inexperienced player needs to realise is that people generally psyche maybe once a year, twice tops (probably even including "baby psyches") and some explicitly do not psyche at all. So it's not as if the game were being overrun by psyches; in the vast majority of sessions, you will not encounter one at all. Basically, it's not worth worrying about, except to be sure that you can handle (1♥)-X-(1♠) and the like.

I was thinking same, the OP meets his first psyche in 20 years and makes a ruckus about it. I could probably count psyches against me on one hand over the years. I don't think it's worth the fuss.

[mycroft]

Yes, compared to misbids, "oh, we play a different system against weak NTs" (well, half of 'we' do), miscounting aces (whether in response to blackwood or passing a "9-count" 13), system forgets (including double system forgets),... the issue with psyches is vanishingly small. But like lightning strikes, if you do get hit with one, you'll remember it for a long time. And remember:

 

"A tactical bid is a psych, made by an expert against a lesser player (aren't we all?), that convinces the lesser player to do something that allows the expert to get away with something. A psych is a tactical bid made against that same expert that got them to do something wrong, and gives a good score to that lesser player. Psyches should be outlawed; but of course that doesn't apply to tactical bids."