2 club mistaken bid

[Vampyr]

I think the assumption is that misbids are more random, they're not more likely to be perpetrated against inexperienced players as tactical maneuvers.

 

The paradoxical thing about psyching against inexperienced players is that you generally don't need to -- they'll often hand you good results all by themselves. Most discussions about "when to psych" advise against doing it against beginners -- it leaves them with a bad feeling, and wasn't necessary in the first place. You should do it to try to get an edge against better players -- they'll never expect it from players they consider weaker than themselves.

 

And if we consider players to be generally honest, it's easy to distinguish misbids from psyches -- just ask the player. But this is also why the White Book recommends recording misbids along with psyches, so we can recognize a pattern. If someone has a habit of similar misbids that are consistent with tactical psyches, we may question their honesty when explaining what happened.

 

The OP is in a jurisdiction where it is illegal to psyche your strongest opening, so the White Book does not apply.

[blackshoe]

Although in the ACBL, the definition of a strong hand is “it looks strong to the player”

This is no longer true. From the current convention charts:

d. “Strong”: A hand that contains:

i. at least 15 HCP; or

ii. at least 14 HCP and meets the “Rule of 24”.

iii. at least 5 Control Points and is within one trick of game assuming suits break evenly among the other hands.

e. “Very Strong”: A hand that contains:

i. at least 20 HCP; or

ii. at least 14 HCP and is within one trick of game assuming suits break evenly among the other hands.

iii. at least 5 Control Points and is within one trick of game assuming suits break evenly among the other hands.

On the Basic chart, an artificial 1!C opening must be strong and forcing; an artificial 2!C opening must be very strong. One might presume that the latter ought also to be forcing, but the regulation does not say so.

 

Note: it seems to me the punctuation in those two definitions is at best confusing. Should there by an "or" at the end of item ii in both cases? Maybe it should be an "and"?

[pran]

Note: it seems to me the punctuation in those two definitions is at best confusing. Should there by an "or" at the end of item ii in both cases? Maybe it should be an "and"?

I vote for "or" in both cases.

[Vampyr]

This is no longer true. From the current convention charts:

 

On the Basic chart, an artificial 1!C opening must be strong and forcing; an artificial 2!C opening must be very strong. One might presume that the latter ought also to be forcing, but the regulation does not say so.

 

Note: it seems to me the punctuation in those two definitions is at best confusing. Should there by an "or" at the end of item ii in both cases? Maybe it should be an "and"?

 

That is a pretty reasonable regulation; perhaps “very strong” is a little restrictive.

[barmar]

The OP is in a jurisdiction where it is illegal to psyche your strongest opening, so the White Book does not apply.

I wasn't suggesting that this be done in the OP's case, just explaining the logic behind the regulations.

[weejonnie]

Maybe East should have asked South if he agreed that he had UI from North's table manner. South's call is allowable if a pass after intervention shows values. If it isn't then we have to see what South's LAs are - and also if EW are damaged (which may depend on whether East would overcall 1NT (playing a WNT) or 1♣)

 

It is unfortunate that North did not know the law about being able to correct a mechanical error (you don't even need to do it without pause for thought these days)

 

Misbidding is not a breach under RA rules - just RWs.