[gwnn]

When the Hog and Justin agree, you know they're on to something!!

[vianu2]

the hog, on 2011-August-13, 04:29, said:

If you decided not to read them, then how did you know they were puerile?

I suggest you read Justin's comments on your bidding and take them to heart.

Obviously I decide to not care about someone or something (regarding the bridge) after a friendly attempt to discover if there is anything of interest for me.
So i spent little time reading about 4,5 posts I didn't find anything there, just flat boards and two "not expert" players acting.
I don't need your suggestion to read the Justin's comments.
There was anything of interest for me on that topic, except Justin's comments . Easy to take them to heart.

[vianu2]

matmat, on 2011-August-12, 16:05, said:

I find it amusing that one of your first threads on the forums was an attempt to accuse someone of cheating, while this one brags about things that actually are bordering on cheating.

Mat i don't know why are you feeling so strong that my auctions are "bordering on cheating". Perhaps I just not take bridge as seriously as you, and when i play i only play for entertainment (and just because i don't have the opportunity to do otherwise).
I agree that my auctions could spoil the pleasure of real players interested in getting a good result, tell me insane or idiot if u like..but please do not accuse me of cheating ok? It seems to me you are fixed on a idea.

[JLOGIC]

gwnn, on 2011-August-13, 04:46, said:

When the Hog and Justin agree, you know they're on to something!!

Too small of a sample to confirm this with empirical evidence

[JLOGIC]

I do have to say I agree with vianu that any kinds of suggestions or implications that he might be cheating based on this is really uncalled for. It is one thing if one of the best players in the world in an event like, say, the cavendish makes an outrageously bad psyche that works with other extenuating circumstances, but someone messing around on BBO and experimenting and then posting the ones that work is no evidence.

In fact, I think it is reasonable to try out psyches and see what works on BBO. That said, I was banned once for doing stuff like that years ago with 3 other friends (because we skewed the results for the field, obv a fair point and we shouldn't have done that), so it is important to remember that especially with random pard/opps doing this frequently is probably a bad idea.

[Rossoneri]

JLOGIC, on 2011-August-13, 06:12, said:

I do have to say I agree with vianu that any kinds of suggestions or implications that he might be cheating based on this is really uncalled for. It is one thing if one of the best players in the world in an event like, say, the cavendish makes an outrageously bad psyche that works with other extenuating circumstances, but someone messing around on BBO and experimenting and then posting the ones that work is no evidence.

In fact, I think it is reasonable to try out psyches and see what works on BBO. That said, I was banned once for doing stuff like that years ago with 3 other friends (because we skewed the results for the field, obv a fair point and we shouldn't have done that), so it is important to remember that especially with random pard/opps doing this frequently is probably a bad idea.

Well I'm pretty sure years ago, after doing that with your friends, you didn't come onto the forums to brag about it.

[vianu2]

Rossoneri, on 2011-August-13, 07:04, said:

Well I'm pretty sure years ago, after doing that with your friends, you didn't come onto the forums to brag about it.

Rossoneri whether u are sure or not about that, for me is irrelevant and it becomes annoying. There are lot of areas to experience and share your excellent bridge knowledge and wisdom . In addition, i just not comment here boards played on BBO, Can you enter this into your head?!

[jschafer]

You claim you psyche frequently for entertainment but I think you should take into consideration that you are ruining the game for at least 3 players at the expense of your entertainment. That doesn't even take into account the 15 other tables (or more in tournaments) which will get silly scores as a result of your bidding. I'm sure every person on this forum has been annoyed at the random moron on the other table going for something ridiculous like 7NTxx-8. Being bad at bridge and getting poor results is something people don't choose to do. However, deliberately psyching against poor players to ruin the game for everyone else is. Playing bridge is obviously not just about the scores but that doesn't mean you should go around psyching willy nilly because you feel like it.

It is no fun playing against someone who psyches every 3 hands and it is even less fun to play with them because this is a partneship game. On two of the hands you posted your partner was still unlimited, how many times did you end up in a terrible contract after getting raised before you got a good result? If you psyche a bit less you would be able to keep decent partners around for long enough to actually enjoy the game without having to resort to excessive psyching. Don't get me wrong, I am not against psyching, but I do it in moderation and not against weaker players than myself who are trying to enjoy the game.


EDIT: I also find it interesting how on the last hand your partner knew what everyone else scored right after the play. Considering you were playing a live tournament he must have beeen psychic!

[kenberg]

My only experience even remotely along these lines was at a club many years ago. I came w/o a partner and was paired with another guy. After a few boards I picked up a hand with five hearts and 25 highs. Partner, in first seat, opened 1♥. Pass on my right, I bid 4♥ since I was already beginning to catch on to his style. Ten tricks exactly with his three count and modest heart holding. He was thrilled by my brilliant catch and wanted to play again. I would rather eat nails.

I don't see the point of playing this way.

[matmat]

JLOGIC, on 2011-August-13, 06:12, said:

I do have to say I agree with vianu that any kinds of suggestions or implications that he might be cheating based on this is really uncalled for. It is one thing if one of the best players in the world in an event like, say, the cavendish makes an outrageously bad psyche that works with other extenuating circumstances, but someone messing around on BBO and experimenting and then posting the ones that work is no evidence.

In fact, I think it is reasonable to try out psyches and see what works on BBO. That said, I was banned once for doing stuff like that years ago with 3 other friends (because we skewed the results for the field, obv a fair point and we shouldn't have done that), so it is important to remember that especially with random pard/opps doing this frequently is probably a bad idea.

Selectively posting psychs that work and bragging about them seems like poor form. Admitting to routinely psyching on particular hands does imply concealed partnership agreements and, imo, questionable ethics.

[vianu2]

matmat, on 2011-August-13, 10:11, said:

Selectively posting psychs that work and bragging about them seems like poor form. Admitting to routinely psyching on particular hands does imply concealed partnership agreements and, imo, questionable ethics.

Mat i am not native , is my english as bad as you (and not only you ) started to discuss here about "routinely psyching"?
When i said "i like" i meant "i like" not " i do", and not " i do routinely".
I think that word , with a nebulously-defined connotation , just created a gap in thinking or brain functioning to lot of people.

I wanted to avoid here an outright opinion or statement of fact that I might be challenged over and over or that someone might take offence at. If there is something i say way too much...in my post..I just don't know how to recover.

I just found amusing to discuss about psyches and not only about "selective psychs that work".
I can post one that didn't work:)

P>S>
Browsing in an urban dictionary i found billion connotations of that word "like" . It seems it is every third word used in some areas ..

[vianu2]

jschafer, on 2011-August-13, 07:49, said:

EDIT: I also find it interesting how on the last hand your partner knew what everyone else scored right after the play. Considering you were playing a live tournament he must have beeen psychic!

7 years ago we still used to write down on the papers the result (now we had evolved)). When you finish to play the board you know the results from your room (or something like that , i never bothered about that, that was my partners job).

Now i will tell you a very short story that came into my mind, about ruining games...
"I think you should take into consideration that you are ruining the game for at least 3 players
at the expense of your entertainment" you say.
Well, once i played in a teams competition. One match i bid in cards and i had only big hands and my partner wrote down on the paper: +100, +1100 , +800 , +620, +300, +1100, +200 ( almost cold 3NT!! ), +920. Ok, he congratulated me at the end for those nice results, hoping to a 25-0 but i didn't get very excited. 2 of those 1100 and 800 had nothing to do with the bridge, opponents just have gone wild and messed up the system. Why not very excited ? Ha. Our teamates messed up much more! -1400!! -1100!! and so on.
We lost that match!! I couldn't believe it, but we lost, and i think the score was 20 for opponents lol. ( i just left the room and didn't bothered).
Those are the players whose game i am ruining with my psyches.

[JLOGIC]

Psyching is an emotional subject in bridge, and a controversial one. I think psyches should be able to be posted and discussed similar to normal bridge hands, eg "is this a good psyche, is this a bad psyche" etc, but I doubt it is actually possible as so many people are anti-psyche, and few have much experience with them at all in order to have a discussion.

I tried to reply to your thread with criticism of your various psyches. That said, you are getting flamed a lot because you did seem like you were bragging about them rather than discussing their merits. Sure, you posted them as interesting/amusing stories, and maybe you weren't bragging, but it came off that way. Most people aren't amused by psyches, now you know, I learned this the hard way

On a serious note I think it is good in a players development to be able to try various psyches and tactics, and see how they work. Sometimes a psyche might be a good strategy, but it's hard to know when/if it is if you never try and and no one ever writes about them.

I think posts like this:

Quote

Admitting to routinely psyching on particular hands does imply concealed partnership agreements and, imo, questionable ethics.

Are wrong, maybe with a certain hand type you will always psyche given a certain set of conditions, maybe you choose different psyches or have many different partners (if you make the same psyche always but with a different partner each time, no problem in that, and I think most people don't have someone they play with near exclusively).

I also think implications of cheating are wrong, obviously these are hand selected for ones that work since he is the one posting them.

I think this is right on though:

Quote

You claim you psyche frequently for entertainment but I think you should take into consideration that you are ruining the game for at least 3 players at the expense of your entertainment.

I don't know how to reconcile that with me thinking that everyone needs experience seeing how various psyches work. As I said, I once got banned for psyching every hand with 3 friends, I was thinking at least then I wasn't ruining the fun of my partner/opps since we were just trying things out, but as jschaefer mentioned it's annoying to the field. I guess be careful the situations you choose to try it in, and how frequently.

I also don't know how to reconcile "general bridge knowledge" and "implicit partnership agreements." For instance, when I am down 60 with 1 quarter to go in the spingold, I frequently psyche. Do my partner and I have an implicit and illegal agreement? Maybe technically, I am not sure, but it is also general bridge knowledge that people who are down will swing and be less likely to have their bids. Even with specific bids, I think every good bridge player knows a 3rd seat white 1N opener will be suspect against someone who is swinging. I recently played a match where my opponents were down 85 and picked up almost all of it by taking actions that would normally be ridiculous, some people even criticized them for doing this saying it's disrespectful to the game! What? Not trying your best to win the match would be disrespectful to the game, what they did was beautiful (imo).

All that said, this is good player vs good player, psyching vs bad players is not a good idea usually imo, but if you are also a non expert then I still don't think it's bad. Just be careful about it not to ruin the fun of other people.

Side note:

I am a huge believer morally/ethically/whatever in not psyching at the club vs weakish opps. I was playing at the club recently with a friend and I had AQJT xxx xxxx xx white against red, and opened 1S in third seat. The opps were people who I would say I would never psyche against. My partner mentioned that I psyched, and I was kind of surprised. I'm not trying to turn this into a semantics debate, I genuinely just believe at matchpoints it would be criminal to not get your spade lead in at this point. I feel like there is a fundamental difference in doing this and opening 1N 3rd w/r with xx xx QJx QJT9xx which I am 100 % sure would be a huge winner at the club and like stealing candy from babies, but also would be wrong. In that case I'm bidding just to steal from them and misrespresenting my hand grossly to do so, knowing they don't have the tools to recover from it. This just seems bad for the game. But AQJT I am bidding spades in order to get a spade lead, and if partner competes in spades I am happy. It is not a stealing thing at all, just consider p p p 1N p 3N vs p p 1S 1N p 3N... 1S just seems like a bridge action to me. So:

1) Should I not make this bid if I believe in not psyching at the club?
2) Is there a difference morally in this and a psyche like the 1N opener, even if semantically they are both a psyche?
3) Is this technically a psyche? What if you added a jack or a queen? If I would always open 1S with this, do I have an implicit partnership agreement to psyche (even if very light 3rd hand is marked on the card, 4 card suits in 3rd marked on the card, etc)? FWIW I was playing with someone I had only played once with before.
4) Now that she has seen this, should she alert my 3rd seat white openers as could be light with a lead director? Against good opps should she, or does this fall under general bridge knowledge that third seat white bids at MP can be light and lead directional?

These all seem unclear to me. Fred told me about a well known player who thinks if you bid a suit when you have the suit and want it led, your action is not a psyche in third seat no matter what. I am way past the point that I get my rocks off from stealing from people at the club, I am not trying to ruin anyones fun, but I also play at the club in order to play bridge, so hopefully you won't judge me too harshly for bidding 1S as I feel it is just the right bridge bid.

[Foxx]

vianu2, on 2011-August-13, 12:30, said:

Sounds to me cool something like that :I am like, I like you a lot, wanna go out....

Good luck, Borat.

[awm]

JLOGIC, on 2011-August-13, 14:13, said:

1) Should I not make this bid if I believe in not psyching at the club?
2) Is there a difference morally in this and a psyche like the 1N opener, even if semantically they are both a psyche?
3) Is this technically a psyche? What if you added a jack or a queen? If I would always open 1S with this, do I have an implicit partnership agreement to psyche (even if very light 3rd hand is marked on the card, 4 card suits in 3rd marked on the card, etc)? FWIW I was playing with someone I had only played once with before.
4) Now that she has seen this, should she alert my 3rd seat white openers as could be light with a lead director? Against good opps should she, or does this fall under general bridge knowledge that third seat white bids at MP can be light and lead directional?

Here are a couple definitions of "psych" or "psychic bid."

ACBL: A deliberate and gross misstatement of honor strength or suit length.
Wikipedia: A call that grossly misstates high card strength or distribution, made so as to deceive the opponents.

It seems that in order to be a psych, the call has to be a "gross misstatement." Who knows what that means, but it seems like if your agreement is that a third-seat 1♠ opening can be as light as 8 or 9 points and can be a four-card suit, the fact that you are off a side jack doesn't qualify as a "gross misstatement." Provided that you have light third seat openings marked on your card I don't see a real issue with this. A literal reading of ACBL alert policy suggests that an agreement to open very light in 3rd seat requires both a pre-alert and an alert during the auction... but in practice I think this is "just bridge" and you will never get in trouble for failing to alert/pre-alert this.

So my answers would be that it's not a psych, that it's different from the 1N opener (which is a psych, since it is a gross misstatement of honor strength and also made with intent to deceive opponents), and that your partner probably should alert your 3rd seat white opening, but that in practice almost nobody does and no director is likely to rule against you.

[the hog]

JLOGIC, on 2011-August-13, 06:08, said:

Too small of a sample to confirm this with empirical evidence

Well I agree with this one too, so the sample has just doubled in size.

[the hog]

vianu2, on 2011-August-13, 07:44, said:

Rossoneri whether u are sure or not about that, for me is irrelevant and it becomes annoying. There are lot of areas to experience and share your excellent bridge knowledge and wisdom . In addition, i just not comment here boards played on BBO, Can you enter this into your head?!

Even your last phrase here shows that you are not a pleasant person. There is no need to be rude to people, particularly when the post was a reply to Justin and not to one of yours.

[vianu2]

the hog, on 2011-August-13, 19:02, said:

Even your last phrase here shows that you are not a pleasant person. There is no need to be rude to people, particularly when the post was a reply to Justin and not to one of yours.

So you pretend he just replied to Justin? There are comments over two pages about psyching on bbo, leaving the table on bbo. posting boards played on bbo , when i claimed right from the start "the boards are played in real tourneys".
So what was he looking for? So I didn't perceived his intrusion as enjoyable and useful for my purpose.

[the hog]

Foxx, on 2011-August-13, 15:38, said:

Good luck, Borat.

No Foxx, Borat is funny and intelligent - well Sascha Baron Cohen is anyway.

[vianu2]

To the disappointment of some (or more ))) i will continue to post here.
I had no intention to talk only about psyches . I meant to generally talk about knowing your opponent and to adapt on the fly to his bridge level. In a club competition or even in regional events, over 50% of players are low level ( at least here, where i am). So you just cannot read their bidding or play, and then you get to misjudgements and bad decisions.
I can post lot of boards in which i played the dumb role.
I have many , i will post one (not sure if so representative).
I was playing with someone known as a good but very imaginative player:)

Once, he said to me something like that:
" I ( "he") played 10 years alone (ignoring my partner because he was clueless), then i played another 10 in partnership (because i decided to give him credit) but that didn't work too:) then now i decided for the last 20 to play "the four hands" or "the four players" and nobody will stop me" .

Here i opened first position ( having real opening ..) 1NT and he decided , at matchpoints, to not pass a 3-3-5-2 hand with diamonds headed by KJ , but to bid Stayman 2CL.
In our club we not alert that 2CL ( is a consensus that it can be weak i think) but anyway it comes very rarely.
My RHO was an weak player but i didn't know.
He doubled that 2CL (t/o in his mind , which is absurd i think).
Anyway opponents didn't have agreements so the X can't be t/o.
At the moment i was convinced he just showed clubs and i redoubled to play it .
When my partner ran in 2D for me wasn't clear that his 2CL didn't show points.
He will always run with single/void in CL..
We didn't agree about that but I had the feeling that he could have bid an weak 2CL.
I bid 2NT in case my partner wasn't weak, because i had diamond fit .
Now LHO bid 3CL ! And pass, pass...to me, being astonished.
At that moment my partner's 2CL just worked . Opponents had a good heart fit and they could write 140 in that board.
But no...i couldn't pass:) I doubled:) In my mind , if RHO passed 3CL then he has clubs wtf...
Of course my partner ran in 3D easy to double by RHO and we got 500 and a 0%.
That's life.
I don't know if opponents will ever come to a contract in hearts..if my partner passes 1NT. 1NT-pass is bad enough lol . But he criticized me a lot for my X in 3cl ( i think he was right ...)

---