how u call this

[uday]

If the mere fact that people disagree with what BBO allows is defined as rude or not nice, then

 

Of course that is not what defines rudeness, and I'm startled that my earlier post led even one person to that conclusion. BBO "allows" just about anything except things that are "not nice".

 

I dont think it matters that a TD runs a T that prohibits this or that, but it does matter that someone is rude and derisive while objecting to this Ts existence. You are free to disagree with the first part of that.

 

In other words, do what you think best for you and the game, express any opinions, privately or publicly. Disagree with bbo, the acbl, hrothgar, tds who run psyche-free non-bridge-tourneys, whatever, whoever, whenever

 

Just be polite and friendly when doing so.

[JanTucson]

Although I think I have a pretty fair idea, please elucidate. WHAT, pray tell, is a "goulash?" :huh:

[scoob]

Although I think I have a pretty fair idea, please elucidate. WHAT, pray tell, is a "goulash?" :huh:

computer generated hands geared towards crazy auctions. games/slams making both ways, voids and 8 card suits, 6-0 trump splits, all the worst parts of the bible.

[pigpenz]

in a goulash tourney almost any bid could be a psyche depending on what your definition of a psyche is :huh: So spell it out for them in the tourney reuglations as to what is acceptable and not.

 

Is opening one spade on six spades and no points in third seat a psyche? Too some yes and others not. So almost anything in third seat is suspicious to start with.

 

So in your tourney discripton spell out what a definition of a psyce is and what a tactical bid etc is, good luck cause even then it might not be clear to all....in my opinion I think its better to just use what is in the rules of bridge and go by that, then there is no question as to what is allowed and what isnt. ;)

[luke warm]

belladonna's original post didn't mention that he disallowed psychs, all he asked was how the board should be adjusted... the answer is, based on the rules of the game we thought we were playing, not at all...

 

i think the number of people playing in no psych tourneys isn't so much an indication of favor as it is an indication of being poorly educated as to the rules of the game... if that's true, imo those types tourney do a disservice to the game

 

as for goulash itself, it's just a diversion, a way to have a little fun... i think

[Finch]

Although I think I have a pretty fair idea, please elucidate. WHAT, pray tell, is a "goulash?" :D

Originally a goulash was dealt by not shuffling the cards after the previous hand (at some London rubber bridge clubs this was done after a board was thrown in, or at the more dramatic ones after any undoubled partial). This often leads to wild distributions.

 

I don't know exactly what is done to the computer to make it deal "goulash" hands.

[helene_t]

This is a psyche of course, but how do you adjust?

 

If a psyche is an "illegal system", as suggested by Frances, then one procedure applies. If it rates as failure to disclose an agreement, then a different procedure applies.

 

Some partnerships frequently psyche specific calls (such as short suit trials) in which case they are not psyches anymore but just another convention. So if a short suit trial is psyched in a regular partnership, it's possible that it's a failure to alert rather than a psyche.

 

One hour ago I fabricated a cuebid on three small cards, primarily because I wanted to know if partner had a control in the suit I bypassed (I wasn't realy concerned about the suit I cued). Was that a psyche?

[luke warm]

helene, your example is why 'no psychs' is a bad way to run a tourney... there's a big difference imo between a psych and a tactical bid, so big that disallowing psychs brings too much subjectivity into the equation

 

but i'd say yes, your bid was a psych to the no-psych people

[mr1303]

To get the best Goulashes, I discovered that if everyone puts their hands in in a certain order, e.g. spades on top of hearts on top of diamonds on top of clubs etc, then redealt in a 4 3 3 3 method (4 cards to LHO, then 3 to CHO, 3 to RHO, 3 to dealer) and this repeated 4 times with a different player being dealt 4 cards each time, they were as wild as possible.

 

 

All doubles became penatly under these systems.

[hrothgar]

there's a big difference imo between a psych and a tactical bid, so big that disallowing psychs brings too much subjectivity into the equation

I'd LOVE to see this difference formally defined...

[luke warm]

well we already have the definition of a psych... a gross misstatement, etc etc... but i agree, the lines are blurry (if they even exist)... a tactical bid can be one made to induce the opponents to take or not take certain actions, such as cue bidding a non-existent ace or stopper

[the hog]

Horrible ruling, again a TD rules based on his bridge knowledge and not in his knowledge of the rules, when we add that the bridge knowledge is very thin (no offense intended) we get a terrible ruling as a result.

1NT is a psyche, psyches in 3rd position in Goulash tourneys should be almost standard, there's nothing to alert, nothing to complain about and nothing to adjust.

will repeat my tourney DOES NOT ALLOW PSYCH ,is in rules,in tourney page and announced when tourney starts,

What tourney and what game? Tiddleywinks, 500, dominoes? Its sure as hell was not bridge!

[Finch]

I don't believe there is a technical difference between a psyche (which is defined in the Laws) and a tactical bid (which isn't).

 

I see two differences in usage:

i) Some people object to psyches when other people do them. When they psyche, they say "but that was an obvious tactical bid, not a psyche at all".

 

ii) When you psyche you intend to deceive both partner and opponents. You hope that is matters more that opponents are deceived. The phrase "tactical bid" is sometimes used when you are just as happy for partner to be deceived as well e.g. when you make a bid that is ostensibly natural on a void because you want partner to lead them, or when you cue on 3 low because you want partner to bid the next suit up.

 

 

 

p.s. does "no psyches" also mean "no false cards"? If not, why not?

[luke warm]

good points... we've all bid a void in a competitive auction, just in case they buy the hand and partner is on lead, on the way to our final contract... i don't see a problem with that... if an opp asks partner what

 

1d (1h) 2d (4h) 5c means, he'd probably say "usually clubs, but could be lead directing" or "usually lead directing, but could be clubs"

[epeeist]

I actually had a situation (as a player, not TD) in a normal (psyches allowed) tournament. I think the quickest, fairest answer is, the TD should adjust to what the likely result would have been if the opponents had been informed the bid was a psyche.

 

 

My experience was, I misclicked a 2♣ opening. Since I know that psyches of artificial bids like a strong 2♣ opening aren't permitted, I sent private chat to the director to ask if I should alert my opponents to the misclick, or say nothing. The TD told the opponents.

 

Of course, because of the delay in my making the inquiry the opponents didn't get told until after the opening lead. But generally, I think that the TD's approach was correct in dealing with an illegal psyche (not that I intended it as such, it was a misclick, but the EFFECT was of an illegal psyche).

 

So similarly, in adjusting in a "no psyche" tournament, I would as TD ask myself "what would the likely result -- both in bidding and play -- have been if the opponents had been informed that the bid was a psyche?" and adjust accordingly.

[mycroft]

hmm, ghoulie, no psychics, no Polish Club (I wonder why not? Why would anyone bring PC to a weird-fest?). I'd probably...

 

EHAA 1st/2nd. Possibly add 1C=13+, known 6+card suit (not necessarily clubs). I'll trade missing the big club fits (against the opps' big anything else fits) for reasonable safety after 1C-4H (speaking of 1C-4H, ghoulie bridge is the best time to psych high-level preemptive overcalls - unless it's the big misfit, try diagnosing the heart fit after I show 8 of them). So 1D/M show 13+ and max 5-5, possibly big balanced (13-20) hands (yeah right, this is ghoulie bridge).

 

Third seat, sound 5-card suit bidding at the one-level, strong playing strength distributional freaks at the two level, and 1NT for everything else. Alerted and explained. We're allowed to pass, but only vulnerable, and we don't have to, we just can.

 

It's not a psychic, Director - it's totally systemic, and written up here in our notes. If you rule against us, I will complain.

 

Oh, you don't want us to play this, either, TD? No problem, we'll just play straightup EHAA. That's legal everywhere, even (after a small adjustment of the classification structure required by the Laws) in Australia.

 

But we've spent all this time designing our system to meet both your published rules and the different requirements of ghoulie bidding to normal, and if you're going to interpret the rules post facto, we're going to make sure people know.

 

If the object of the tournament is for people to find out whose bidding system is least damaged by the fact that they're going to spend 90% of the time in the fringe world that most bidding systems ignore because it's too uncommon to be allowed for, fine. But that's like asking people to go down Lombard Street with their choice of ice skates, figure skates, skis or snowboard.

 

OTOH, Ghoulie bridge to me involves picking your partner after the auction, and psychics expected, especially as dealer. So I can't imagine playing a known weirdie game without the possibility of psychics - especially those preemptive overcalls.

 

Michael.

[helene_t]

Those TDs who run non-psyche tournaments must do so for good intensions. I can immagine two reasons one might have for banning psyches:

1) Avoid that established partnerships fail to disclose their agreements and subsequently use "it was a psyche" as an excuse.

2) Protect inexperienced partnerships against more experienced partnerships who use psyches in situations in which it is commonly understood among experienced players that a call is likely to be a psyche. For example responses to preempts.

 

Maybe there are other reasons. Anyway, I have some sympathy for reason 2). There are also a lot of problems with banning psyches. But since ACBL and also some other organizations (the Austrian BF, at least earlier, and the Dutch bridge-site StepBridge) put restrictions on psyches in certain low-level events, it appears to be a topic that one can have different opinions about. So I don't think it's reasonable to dismiss non-psyche tournaments with the statement "It's not bridge".

 

Even if it is undeniably true that non-psyche bridge is not bridge, then so what? It's just a semantics issue. Is robber-bridge bridge? What about the anual Christmas tournament at the local club, in which a deck contains 53 cards, or you get a bonus for making the last trick with ♦7 ? I don't care if it can be called bridge or not. The important thing is that the TD announces what the rules are. Then you can vote with your feet if you dislike the rules.

 

In any case, do not insult those TDs who do a hard and unpayed job. They are scarce and will be scarcer as we continue to insult them every time they ask for assistance on this forum.

 

Personally, I avoid the non-psyche tournaments. Not that it's important to me to make psyches, I almost never do so. And if the TD announced something like "Please remember that you are playing against beginners that are here to practice the very basic of bridge. So try to avoid confusing tactics like psyches, kamikaze-preempts and artificial disrubtive methods" then I would have no problems with it. Then I might still open light in third seat or false-card as declarer, and maybe the TD would tell me not to do it again and I would apologize. We would not be talking about adjustments since that's not the issue. It's about having a nice time and teach the basics to the beginners. Fine.

 

But the problem is that I know that for many TDs it's hard enough to enforce the laws even when the laws are clear-cut. Now they amend the laws using the ill-defined concept of a "psyche". I would be nervous that any "strange" call or play that I might make could be rated as a psyche. Misclick, up-grading of a good 14 counts to open 1NT, depart from a signalling convention to spare a valuable card etc. OK, you tell me I'm paranoid, that's probably true. But then I say that I play to have fun and when the rules are such that it is not fun for paranoid people like me, then I'm gone.

[McBruce]

♠ K 7 6 4

♥ void

♦ K J 9 4

♣ J T 8 5 2

 

Recent ACBL Indy, 3 tables. None vul, two passes to me, and I passed as well. Fourth seat LHO opened 2NT and RHO bid 3♦ without an alert (they had agreed sayc I think). I decided to throw in a 3♥ call. LHO doubled, partner escaped to 3♠, and this was passed around to LHO, the 2NT opener, who now bid...5♦. Why? Don't ask me.

 

South and West passed. So did I, of course.

 

I led the 4♠ and dummy hit: a 3=5=3=2 22 count.

 

Declarer was not amused, but lost no time in calling the TD to claim a psyche. When that didn't work, declarer tried to claim a concealed partnership agreement--in an individual tournament! That didn't work either. The declarer had set his skill level as expert and it was clear that this was because of his expertise at nonsensical post-mortems. The result was not pretty, but it's one board--big deal...

 

This is the type of player who will play no-psyche games.

 

Me, I allow psyches, although perhaps it would be educational for BBO to run a no-psyches game and give suspensions to anyone wrongly claiming a psyche by an opponent. :lol:

[Gerben42]

  hmm, ghoulie, no psychics, no Polish Club (I wonder why not? Why would anyone bring PC to a weird-fest?). I'd probably...

 

Why would anyone bring PC to a weird-fest? Well because it is one of the most natural system in the world? Because it doesn't need a 2♣ opening showing a strong hand with ANY distribution? Because it is the standard system where many BBO players come from? Because unlike most standard systems it is actually a good system?

 

Gee, no idea why anyone would play such a system...

 

Furthermore I think it is the job of bridge teachers and those who teach bridgeteachers to make sure that everyone is aware that psyching is allowed and not evil.