[jillybean]

---

ACBL

NS plays a 15-17nt

At the end of the hand E/W call the Director and point to the 1nt opening.

I will post the full hand and auction momentarily, but given this information what is
your initial response?

[smerriman]

jillybean, on 2025-April-02, 19:19, said:

given this information what is your initial response?

Given solely that information, psychs are legal.

[shyams]

Looks like a psyche.

Unless E/W find reasons to believe that South "fielded" their partner's psyche, this is perfectly legal.

[johnu]

ACBL Definition of psych: “Psych”:
Generally, 2 cards fewer or an Ace weaker than the minimum expected for a bid would meet the definition of a Psych, as would an Ace stronger than the maximum expected.

So, for a 15-17 NT, anything with 11 HCP or fewer (or 21+ HCP) should qualify as a psych. With 12 HCP, this would be a disallowed opening bid.

[mycroft]

My initial response: "Why did you think this was a 1NT opener?"

I have my own opinions, but let's hear from North first, before passing judgement on not only what he was thinking but what we think he was thinking.

As GordonTD is known to say "you know, if you ask them, they almost always tell the truth. Maybe slanted as much as possible to their side, but players rarely ever straight up lie."

[jillybean]

North, a Pro, will tell you it was a psych.

[sanst]

AFAIK is a 1NT opening bid in the third seat, nv vs. v, with a hand like this not unusual for a (semi)pro. It's something else if S knows this and bids accordingly. Implicit agreements are still agreements and I wouldn't buy 'psych' as an explanation. If S is totally unware of a 1NT call on a hand like this and bids like it was a 15...17 pts, then it's okay. Otherwise, I throw the book at them.

[jillybean]

Well, this is very difficult to determine isn't it.
The Director said it was illegal.
North told them to go and refer to an experienced Director.
It was ruled a legal psych.

[Cyberyeti]

jillybean, on 2025-April-03, 06:28, said:

Well, this is very difficult to determine isn't it.
The Director said it was illegal.
North told them to go and refer to an experienced Director.
It was ruled a legal psych.

It's a legal psyche if you do it once, it's an implicit agreement if you do it more often which is why psyches need recording. Of course if their partner doesn't react with a 9-10 count ...

[jillybean]

sanst, on 2025-April-03, 02:39, said:

AFAIK is a 1NT opening bid in the third seat, nv vs. v, with a hand like this not unusual for a (semi)pro.

Cyberyeti, on 2025-April-03, 06:36, said:

It's a legal psyche if you do it once, it's an implicit agreement if you do it more often which is why psyches need recording.

jillybean, on 2025-April-03, 06:28, said:

The Director said it was illegal.
North told them to go and refer to an experienced Director.

[shyams]

A. It's a legal psyche because it conforms to the ACBL definition quoted by johnu above. The North hand has only 10 HCPs so it's more than an Ace weaker compared to the normal 1NT opening.

B. I'm no TD but I think it is a legal psyche even if North has made the same type of bid previously.
Here, it then becomes incumbent on South to alert all 1NT bids in the situation where North could potentially have psyched. e.g. alert all 3rd seat 1NT openings when NS is non-vul and explain (e.g.) normally 15-17 bal but North has psyched on 2 previous occasions in 3rd seat when NV.

C. Cyberyeti and sanst wrote about South not acting with suitable hands (e.g. bal 10 count but passing). The TD may penalise NS if this were to occur. I believe (but others can confirm) that this will apply even when N/S claim that it's the first time ever that they have psyched 1NT.

[hrothgar]

jillybean, on 2025-April-03, 06:28, said:

Well, this is very difficult to determine isn't it.
The Director said it was illegal.
North told them to go and refer to an experienced Director.
It was ruled a legal psych.

Sounds like this was all handled properly

The only real issue is whether the initial director should be allowed to direct real events

[blackshoe]

It's a legal psych until psycher's partner begins to expect that his partner is psyching. At that point it becomes an illegal^* agreement.

^* Illegal because the range 10 to 17 is more than 5 HCP.

[mycroft]

Next question - note I haven't even come close to ruling yet:
"South, do you have any experience with this partner playing around in third seat?"

I hope the "get a real director" comment was ... not that. Or I would assume that, having discussed it with the DIC and/or other directors (who would probably send me to the DIC to discuss), the "Psych, legal, we're noting it for future reference" (*) ruling would be followed up with "and we're assigning a 1/4 board penalty for that comment. I was wrong initially, sorry; there are ways to object to the ruling that don't involve disrespect."

I would love to know the rest of the auction. As I said, I'm not even close to ruling by this point.

(*) and, in private to E-W if they continue to complain, "and if you're surprised by this in the BRP, don't be. It's legal, it's common (for psychs, at least), and you are expected to be able to handle it in the Big Game." Note to mlkl: this is the 20 word version of "baby psych" - one so reasonable and (relatively) common that you should be able to figure it out.