lamford, on 2013-October-23, 06:39, said:
That is not what Law 40A3 says.
Quote
This says clearly that if I think my partner has psyched, I can allow for that, as long as my thinking that partner has psyched is not based on an undisclosed partnership understanding. I do not need to assume that the opponents have psyched or misbid.
This is a case where anybody with a little bridge experience will be pretty sure that partner has psyched, independent of any partnership understanding. If you hold a poll, present the hand, the auction and the vulnerability and ask: "What is going on?", you will hear two possible answers:
1) partner has psyched
2) we are not playing with the same deck
I've been playing bridge for 20 years now. Believe it or not, none of my partners has ever psyched when they played with me (or on the few occasions that they played against me). Never. If I can sense that partner has psyched, anybody can.
If other players -who don't even know who partner is- conclude that partner has psyched, then how can the conclusion that partner has psyched be based on an undisclosed partnership understanding?
Rik