[ImsinD]

ACBL land

W opens 3♥ 1st seat N Pass E bids 4NT, S Pass, W bids 5♥ showing 2 keycards all passes.

E has ♠xx, ♥QJxx, ♦Kx, ♣JT9xx

Both EW and NS are good players in long established partnerships

Is the 4NT a psych ? If yes, is it legal ?

Thanks
ImsinD

[FrancesHinden]

Is 4NT a psyche? - depends on the explanation and the partnership agreement for its meaning


If the agreement about 4NT is 'shows a hand that expects to make a slam opposite the right number of keycards' then yes, bidding it on that hand is a psyche
If the agreement about 4NT is 'asks partner how many keycards for hearts he has, says nothing about the bidder's hand or strength' then no it isn't a psyche

Is it legal? - Yes. Whether or not it is a psyche.

[aguahombre]

Opposite an opening preempt, 4nt (if asking for key cards) merely asks a question about key cards. There is nothing for Opener to "field" or use; he just answers the question his partner asked. IOW, we can call it a psych if we want to, but that is irrelevant.

If we love naming things, fine. 4nt definitely is a tactic, no matter what Responder has in his hand; it is a tactic to determine how many keycards Opener has.

If playing in a club where psychs are banned rather than a Bridge Club, I would argue that it is not a psych. It isn't distorting, it is asking.

[jfnrl]

Forbidden in France (psyche protected by the system).
Imho, it's the same thing in ABCL land : see last para of :
http://www.acbl.org/...sychic-bidding/
"Therefore, a legal agreement that creates a risk-free psychic environment (that is an environment where the psycher knows his partner is under control – this does not include hands where we know because of our particular hand that we have an answer to most things that our partner can do to us) becomes illegal if the pair psyches. (Office Policy – 08/1995)"

[aguahombre]

 jfnrl, on 2015-July-31, 07:04, said:

Forbidden in France (psyche protected by the system).
Imho, it's the same thing in ABCL land : see last para of :
http://www.acbl.org/...sychic-bidding/
"Therefore, a legal agreement that creates a risk-free psychic environment (that is an environment where the psycher knows his partner is under control – this does not include hands where we know because of our particular hand that we have an answer to most things that our partner can do to us) becomes illegal if the pair psyches. (Office Policy – 08/1995)"

The agreement is to answer Responder's question, in this case keycards. No matter how many times this guy has done it in the past, it is not an agreement in the sense of the regulations.

We have been over this before in discoussions on (say) 2nt asking bids over partner's weak 2-bid; these are ploys worn out by time and perfectly legal in the ACBL.

If an opponent has a takeout Double of the weak two-bid, he can double 2nt and expose the psych. If an opponent has a big nt hand, he can wait until righty is finished screwing around, and double or bid nt. If he has a systemic call over the two-bid in balancing seat, he can make that systemic call (say, mike or leaping mike) over 2nt.

Anyone at the table who needs to know what responder is doing will know.

[WesleyC]

The important thing to take from this deal is that the next time EW bids 4NT in this auction they should explain the possible psyche as part of the bid description.

[mycroft]

"asking for keycards, willing to play at least 5 of partner's suit."

This is a "until you've seen it, you'll never have thought about it; once you have seen it, it will never catch you again" thing. Same thing with 2NT "ask" over a weak 2 bid, and other "usually strong, but we don't guarantee that it's strong" types of interrogative bids.

It's only a psychic call if it's a misstatement of length and/or strength, compared to their agreement. If the agreement is "slam try", then it's a psychic. If the agreement is "tell me keycards", then, as Frances says, it's not. If *your agreement* for 4NT is "slam try", well, that doesn't really matter - unless you pull the stunt yourself.

Now, if they have an agreement that opener can't double a "sacrifice" or take the push to 6 after, say:
3♥-p-4NT-X;
p (D0P1)-5♦-5♥-6♦;
*that* may be a psychic control to the ACBL regulations (similar to "you can't raise my pull of mini-1NT no matter what your support is").

[aguahombre]

On my planet, a preemptor doesn't get to do anything but preempt, answer questions, and relax.

[PhilKing]

This reminds me of the hand where McCallum/Shuman got water boarded for passing RKCB.

[lamford]

 jfnrl, on 2015-July-31, 07:04, said:

Forbidden in France (psyche protected by the system).
Imho, it's the same thing in ABCL land : see last para of :
http://www.acbl.org/...sychic-bidding/
"Therefore, a legal agreement that creates a risk-free psychic environment (that is an environment where the psycher knows his partner is under control – this does not include hands where we know because of our particular hand that we have an answer to most things that our partner can do to us) becomes illegal if the pair psyches. (Office Policy – 08/1995)"

I think that contravenes 40A3:
"A player may make any call or play without prior announcement provided that such call or play is not based on an undisclosed partnership understanding (see Law 40C1)."
I suppose that an RA can allow one to play RKCB, but not allow one to pysche it, but it is a bit like banning Stayman or Drury if your partner has psyched, or banning an opening 2C with a weak two in diamonds. My guess is that the ACBL, and to a lesser extent the EBU, ignore 40A3.

[RMB1]

 lamford, on 2015-August-01, 12:05, said:

I suppose that an RA can allow one to play RKCB, but not allow one to pysche it, but it is a bit like banning Stayman or Drury if your partner has psyched, or banning an opening 2C with a weak two in diamonds.

This power is in Law 40B2(d) "The Regulating Authority may restrict the use of psychic artificial calls."

 lamford, on 2015-August-01, 12:05, said:

My guess is that the ACBL, and to a lesser extent the EBU, ignore 40A3.

AFAIK The EBU does not restrict the use of psychic artificial calls. Although it does recognise that tournament organisers running a 'level 3' event may choose to forbid psyching a multi 2D.

[akwoo]

I would consider this a psych, since implicit in asking for keycards is some bridge reason for knowing how many keycards partner has, and I can't see any.

However, I don't think this is a protected psych. Mycroft gives what I think is the right explanation of the ACBL regulation and how it applies to this case.

[karlson]

You could easily make an argument that knowing how many keycards partner has will help you decide whether to save over their slam.

I just don't see how these types of bids could possibly be regulated, and I find it hard to imagine that this is something the writers intended to fall under "controlled psychs".

[sanst]

 lamford, on 2015-August-01, 12:05, said:

I think that contravenes 40A3:
"A player may make any call or play without prior announcement provided that such call or play is not based on an undisclosed partnership understanding (see Law 40C1)."
I suppose that an RA can allow one to play RKCB, but not allow one to pysche it, but it is a bit like banning Stayman or Drury if your partner has psyched, or banning an opening 2C with a weak two in diamonds. My guess is that the ACBL, and to a lesser extent the EBU, ignore 40A3.

There is also 40B2d: 'The RA may restrict the use of psychic artificial calls'.

[sanst]

 ImsinD, on 2015-July-30, 15:36, said:

ACBL land

W opens 3♥ 1st seat N Pass E bids 4NT, S Pass, W bids 5♥ showing 2 keycards all passes.

E has ♠xx, ♥QJxx, ♦Kx, ♣JT9xx

Both EW and NS are good players in long established partnerships

Is the 4NT a psych ? If yes, is it legal ?

Thanks
ImsinD

Assuming it's a preempt and some form of Blackwood, yes, it's a psych. But I would congratulate my opps if they did it and have a good score with a very well placed psych, that might also have ended in a complete disaster.

[blackshoe]

"Psych or tactic?"

The two are not mutually exclusive.

[barmar]

 blackshoe, on 2015-August-02, 08:56, said:

"Psych or tactic?"

The two are not mutually exclusive.

Some people define them as such. I've heard comments like "It wasn't a psych, it was a tactical bid." But I don't know if there's a concensus about the distinction, it seems more like a Humpty-Dumpty definition (when they do it to me it's a psych, when I do it it's a tactical bid).

An example might be using McCabe even if you haven't agreed on this convention. You bid the suit you want partner to lead, and then when the opponents double you, you pull the double to partner's suit. I've seen this "tactic" mentioned numerous times in bridge columns. And if they don't double you, it's just 50 points a trick, hopefully cheap against their game.

[lamford]

 sanst, on 2015-August-02, 04:09, said:

There is also 40B2d: 'The RA may restrict the use of psychic artificial calls'.

If you pass Drury or pass Stayman, it is not the artificial call that is psychic, it is the opening bid of 1M or 1NT, so the artificial call has not been used illegally. If you pass RKCB, at favourable vulnerability, having opened 4H with a weak two in spades, then again the artificial call is not psychic, the opening bid is. It is not possible to "psyche" RKCB. The bid asks partner to show the number of key cards she has whether or not the hand merits such an enquiry. A psyche is a gross distortion of suit length or strength, so a bid that does not show suit length or strength cannot be a distortion.

Also, if you open a weak 2H and double 3NT to say that you did not have a weak two hearts after all, that seems to be legal, although specifically banned (when I last looked) by the EBU, which call this a Watson double and disallows it if you have psyched. However, it is not the artificial call (double saying don't lead a heart) that is psychic, but the original weak 2H when you actually held a weak two in spades. 2H was not artificial, so the RA may not restrict it from being psyched under 40B2d.

[blackshoe]

 barmar, on 2015-August-03, 00:28, said:

Some people define them as such. I've heard comments like "It wasn't a psych, it was a tactical bid." But I don't know if there's a concensus about the distinction, it seems more like a Humpty-Dumpty definition (when they do it to me it's a psych, when I do it it's a tactical bid).

Heh. Well, as a friend of mine used to say, they're entitled to their wrong opinion. I do agree with the Humpty Dumpty bit. He was wrong too.

[blackshoe]

 lamford, on 2015-August-03, 03:32, said:

Also, if you open a weak 2H and double 3NT to say that you did not have a weak two hearts after all, that seems to be legal, although specifically banned (when I last looked) by the EBU, which call this a Watson double and disallows it if you have psyched. However, it is not the artificial call (double saying don't lead a heart) that is psychic, but the original weak 2H when you actually held a weak two in spades. 2H was not artificial, so the RA may not restrict it from being psyched under 40B2d.

Perhaps the EBU consider the double a psychic control, rather than a psych in itself.