[Double !]

Let me add some additional information to this saga.

1) I was Toystar's partner and I only rebid 3H because i had xxx in his help-wanted suit. My club king was of questionable value.

2) He played the hand very well and made 7.

3) FWIW, as I told him, I agreed with the 3D bid. Actually, had I bid 4H after 3D I could see someone accusing me of fielding his psych.

4) As I was typing vwdp, all of a sudden, Toystar was gone. No one said anything. He was just gone. He asked me why I had booted him but I told him that I didn't boot him nor had control of the table. I asked both opps why he was booted and to please let him sit, but received no response from the apparent booter. IMO, he deserves an apology for being subjected to this.

5) Question: doesn't the BBO site have very specific rules stipulating when one may and may not boot a player? To the best of my knowledge, psyching is not one of the conditions.


DHL

[neilkaz]

Double !, on May 20 2007, 10:51 PM, said:

Let me add some additional information to this saga.

1) I was Toystar's partner and I only rebid 3H because i had xxx in his help-wanted suit. My club king was of questionable value.

2) He played the hand very well and made 7.

3) FWIW, as I told him, I agreed with the 3D bid. Actually, had I bid 4H after 3D I could see someone accusing me of fielding his psych.

4) As I was typing vwdp, all of a sudden, Toystar was gone. No one said anything. He was just gone. He asked me why I had booted him but I told him that I didn't boot him nor had control of the table. I asked both opps why he was booted and to please let him sit, but received no response from the apparent booter. IMO, he deserves an apology for being subjected to this.

5) Question: doesn't the BBO site have very specific rules stipulating when one may and may not boot a player? To the best of my knowledge, psyching is not one of the conditions.


DHL

Getting booted here is the height of rudeness and said should 1) be ashamed 2) be reported. 3) get a life.

.. neilkaz ..

[redbird97]

I imagine my question would have been, why didn't you bid 3d over 2h?
That seems like an automatic bid to me....

[helene_t]

DrTodd13, on May 21 2007, 02:20 AM, said:

jdonn, on May 20 2007, 11:51 AM, said:

but you have every right to ask them to leave (and then boot them if they don't comply) for any reason at all, even a petty one and even with no prior warning. I can't say it makes me like the person who did this, but it's their right.

When I said they "can't" I meant they "shouldn't." Just like if I say I can't come up and punch you in the face it means that I shouldn't even though I'm perfectly capable of doing it. If they forget to say they don't allow psyches then it would be proper to tell them at their first psyche that you don't allow that at your table but since you forgot to tell them you can't blame them. Sure, if you're an ass then you can kick them right then and there but likewise I have a right to dislike that person for being an ass.

Well said, Todd. I wonder what's next. Suppose I ask someone to leave as I find out that s/he's, say, Chinese, or 60 YO, or left-handed. I can ask people to leave for any reason, right?

[jdonn]

You are being ridiculous with that analogy. He was asked to leave for a bridge related reason. Isn't what's great about BBO the fact that people can make their own tables with a game that suits their own conditions and tastes? If he had asked his opponent politely to leave after the hand instead of booting him then I still would not see what the problem was, it is just the booting that was rude.

[pork rind]

i like the analogy also, but then i live in the south where we believe in courtesy. and if you are not courteous then we get in your face.

[helene_t]

jdonn, on May 21 2007, 08:38 AM, said:

If he had asked his opponent politely to leave after the hand instead of booting him then I still would not see what the problem was, it is just the booting that was rude.

I disagree. He was feeling stupid because he was trapped by a classic tactical bid. Then he made up some rule on the fly in order to get revenge. If he'd asked politely it may not have been sufficient reason to report it to abuse, but certainly enough to mark him as an enemy.

Cascade said:

It doesn't make any sense to alert a (potential) psychic bid.

A psychic bid is by definition a gross misdescription of suit length or honour strength.

On the other hand you alert partnership agreements that differ from some standard - non-alertable bids.

If you alert then you are really saying that your agreement is that the bid is a two-way bid - either a genuine game try of whatever persuasion you happen to play or some variety of random bid attempting to deceive the opponent. The fact that you would feel a need to alert means that this bid has crossed the divide from psychic to partnership understanding which needs to be disclosed.

Agree. What I was refering to was agreements such as
1m-(X)-1M*
could be a 3-card (even a bad 3-card) so opener is not allowed to raise with 3 (or, if he is, a subsequent 3m by responder exposes the psyche). You're right that this is not a psyche but a two-way bid.

[hrothgar]

blackshoe, on May 21 2007, 12:46 AM, said:

It is tantamount to the flat statement I read in a recent book on bidding: "ethical players never psych."

Out of curiosity, who wrote that?

[kenberg]

The legitimacy of this auction depends on what E knows of W's style. Sitting E, hearing 1H-2H-3D-3H-4H, I would assume that E held (or was faking) the ace of diamonds and was interested in slam if I had good values. Is that not how everyone would bid holding a W hand that wanted to make a below game slam try? Since my hand, the E hand, is pretty good for my bidding opposite such a W hand, I would bid 4S over 4H and if partner responded 5C I would bid 6H. Possibly a really good result if they still fail to find the D lead. Not so good if they lead the D. If the EW agreements preclude bidding over 4H on this auction, the opponents need to be told. If they are a casual partnership then there is no problem.

I can't recall ever booting anyone for any reason other than for being a pain in the butt so I disagree with the booting. I also would not ask anyone to leave. At most I would ask about their agreements, but in a casual game I would let it go, assuming that no such detailed agreements exist.

[pclayton]

There's a world of difference between opening 1N on: xx, xx, xx, QJTxxxx and making a fake cue.

If I choose to rebid 1N after 1♣ - (1♠) - dbl - (pass) with: xxx, Qxx, AKx, Axxx, is that a psyche?

If I choose to make a 4♦ splinter on a hand like: AKQx, AKQxx, Kx, xx after I've opened with 1♥ and heard 1♠ by pard is that a psyche?

If I balance with 3N after a 3♠ opening on my left with: Qx, Ax, AKQxxxx, Kx, is that a psyche?

[SoTired]

Jlall, on May 21 2007, 09:12 AM, said:

hrothgar, on May 21 2007, 07:48 AM, said:

blackshoe, on May 21 2007, 12:46 AM, said:

It is tantamount to the flat statement I read in a recent book on bidding: "ethical players never psych."

Out of curiosity, who wrote that?

This is so bogus it's not even funny. It's things like this that make people have such ridiculous attitudes about psyches/tactical bids.

no no... i think blackshoe is right. i read it, too. i believe in a book by Reese.

[bid_em_up]

Just a few thoughts:

1) Toystar was playing with Double!. They do not appear to be a regular partnership, so there is no possibility of "fielding" a psyche.
2) It really isn't a psyche. It is a tactical bid or a lead inhibiting bid.
3) Why on earth would you ever alert a psyche? How would you alert this? "Opps, I'm psyching, whack my butt now?" Come on. If you make a psyche, there is never a reason to alert it.
4) Yes, the table host was rude. Mark them as enemy and move on.

[pclayton]

Jlall, on May 21 2007, 06:12 AM, said:

hrothgar, on May 21 2007, 07:48 AM, said:

blackshoe, on May 21 2007, 12:46 AM, said:

It is tantamount to the flat statement I read in a recent book on bidding: "ethical players never psych."

Out of curiosity, who wrote that?

This is so bogus it's not even funny. It's things like this that make people have such ridiculous attitudes about psyches/tactical bids.

I was playing a team game at Dana Point last week. Gilbert makes a riduclous underbid on a 15 count after I overcalled, since 'obviously' I psyched, because the opps were bidding like crazy.

I had a 5 count. We are cold for 4♠ with my 5-5.

The learned lady to my left with about 275 masterpoints gently warned me that psyching is not allowed in ACBL. I kindly told her that unless it was a I/N game that psyching is specifically allowed.

She later told me how Michaels is the only proper way to play a direct cue bid.

I'll never learn.

[pclayton]

SoTired, on May 21 2007, 06:31 AM, said:

Jlall, on May 21 2007, 09:12 AM, said:

hrothgar, on May 21 2007, 07:48 AM, said:

blackshoe, on May 21 2007, 12:46 AM, said:

It is tantamount to the flat statement I read in a recent book on bidding: "ethical players never psych."

Out of curiosity, who wrote that?

This is so bogus it's not even funny. It's things like this that make people have such ridiculous attitudes about psyches/tactical bids.

no no... i think blackshoe is right. i read it, too. i believe in a book by Reese.

I think reese wrote it too, but I think he wrote it in the context of playing rubber bridge against really bad players.

[fred]

Anyone familiar with the recent thread on "123 stop" will know that my regular partner and I frequently psych game tries. Here is how we handle this situation:

1) We alert our game tries even though they are natural bids

2) If an opponent asks our answer is: it shows 4+ cards in the suit, but he could have just about any holding

3) We always respond as if partner has 4+ cards in the suit

The key point in my view is that, if you do something like this once, then it is a psych - no big deal. If you do this more than once with the same partner, it is not a psych anymore - it is part of your system. In this case the opponents have the right to know as much as you do even if the partner of the possible "psycher" will always play the person who made the game try to have a "normal" hand for his bid.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[P_Marlowe]

bid_em_up, on May 21 2007, 09:49 AM, said:

Just a few thoughts:

1)  Toystar was playing with Double!. They do not appear to be a regular partnership, so there is no possibility of "fielding" a psyche.
2) It really isn't a psyche. It is a tactical bid or a lead inhibiting bid.
3) Why on earth would you ever alert a psyche?  How would you alert this?  "Opps, I'm psyching, whack my butt now?" Come on.  If you make a psyche, there is never a reason to alert it.
4) Yes, the table host was rude. Mark them as enemy and move on.

#2 What is the difference between a tactical bid and a psych bid?
There is no difference.
#3 Thats the main problem.
Playing Online bridge, one alerts his own bids.
You alert the bid (according to partnership agreement),
but your hand does not match the explanation you gave
about your own hand, what do you think the explanation was?
The truth or a lie. Unless your opponents know you, sad as it
is, they will believe the later.
=> Playing with strangers in the MBC or in a general tourney,
it does not pay to make a psych bid, because they dont trust
you, and you have to accept, that they believe you a scoudrel (?!,
just wanna try out a english word I came across).
#4 See #3, no excuse for rudeness, but may explain it to some extend.

Re #3: (a related example, but face to face bridge)
A world class female player made a artificial psych bid, unfortunately her
partner explained it wrong, but the explanation did match with the hand she
held. She became declarer, and before the lead was made corrected the
explanation. The opening leader now choose a lead, which lead the contract
through, ... he would have found the correct lead, with the wrong information.
Several players interviewed at the tournament found declarers action unethical.
Sry, I for got the tournament and the name of the players involved.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[bid_em_up]

P_Marlowe, on May 21 2007, 10:56 AM, said:

#2 What is the difference between a tactical bid and a psych bid?  There is no difference.

Of course there is a difference. A psyche is usually based on garbage and may or may not work well, even if you have a suit to run to.

With the tactical bid, the opening bidder is always bidding 4H, regardless of what his partner does or what the opponents do. He is simply attempting to draw attention away from a possible diamond lead. Is it a form of a psyche? Sure. But it is one that is made with a specific intent or tactic in mind. Of course, by bidding game over partners non-acceptance of the game try, you also tend to clue good opponents into the fact that the 3D call might have been a tactical bid.

Quote

#3 Thats the main problem.
     Playing Online bridge, one alerts his own bids.
     You alert the bid (according to partnership agreement),
     but your hand does not match the explanation you gave
     about your own hand, what do you think the explanation was?

There is nothing to alert. Assuming you are playing 3D as a natural game try, what are you supposed to alert it as? IF the opponents asked for an explanation, you would say "natural game try". There is nothing more to tell them, as that IS your partnership agreement (assuming you even have one).

Quote

because they dont trust you, and you have to accept, that they believe you a scoudrel (?!, just wanna try out a english word I came across).

The word is "scoundrel".

[DrTodd13]

helene_t, on May 20 2007, 10:18 PM, said:

Well said, Todd. I wonder what's next. Suppose I ask someone to leave as I find out that s/he's, say, Chinese, or 60 YO, or left-handed. I can ask people to leave for any reason, right?

Most people get the concepts of right/wrong and legal/illegal all mixed up. They think that everything wrong should be illegal. For me, one example of something wrong that is legal is kicking someone from your table. If you "own" the table you should be able to ask them to leave or just plain kick them for any reason or no reason. However, if you do so, it doesn't mean what you've done is socially acceptable. Someone has joined a table with every expectation that the rules of bridge are in effect only to find later that law 40 doesn't apply. If you sit down and the host says "law 40 replaced here with 'thou shalt not psyche'" and you psyche anyway then you deserve to get kicked. If I get kicked for being 60 and Chinese then I have no recourse other than to spread the word that the person who kicked me is an ageist and racist.