Declarer called me after the hand to complain that he had expected more length in ♠ and ♦ to his left. As played at the table, declarer was off 1, for 2- match points from a top of 8. Dealmaster Pro hand analysis shows 3NT going down 1. On inquiry, I determined that declarer had received an accurate description of defenders' agreement. S sheepishly admitted that he had gotten some of his suits confused in arranging his cards. I ruled that the hand should be scored as played at the table, citing L75C. On further questioning by declarer, he asked if this was a psychic bid. I told him that even if it was, there was no violation of L40C.1. and 2. since he had received an accurate description and offender's partner had no more reason to be aware of the deviation than declarer. Declarer then pointed out a recent ruling he was involved with when an opponent psyched a Flannery opener which was disallowed under item 2 of the ACBL General Convention Chart. That made me pause as the Chart disallows "psyching conventional suit responses, which are less than 2NT, to natural openings." I have not adjusted the score yet, partly as I didn't have much sympathy for W raising to game given the auction but I am willing to reconsider.
First, is a sandwich NT a "conventional SUIT response"? Second, is a player allowed to make an honest mistake in arranging his cards and bidding based on what he believes he holds? I suspect that the answer lies with the player, i.e., level of accomplishment, history of psychic calls, age and physical condition, etc. I would appreciate the thoughts of the group.