[dickiegera]

2 clubs was their strong bid

---

I sitting East try to bid if possible over strong 2♣ or1♣ opener that is why I bid 2♥

After my bid North got strange look on face and did other body movements indicating sometime wrong

However the bidding continued as shown.

I am not complaining about the result
I do know that one is not allowed to psych a 2♣ opener, however what if the 2♣
bid was a mistaken bid that was not corrected?

[Vampyr]

Too many players are unaware that they can correct a true mispull before partner calls, so I can understand North’s dilemma.

South, however, has made flagrant use of UI, and I would apply a disciplinary penalty of five times the standard amount. Also I would adjust the score but to what I am too tired to work out.

Also, I do not know whether it is actually legal to ban psyching. But since your RA has chosen to do this, then of course they must treat misbids the same as psyches.

Was 2♥ systemically the majors?

[HardVector]

Are we trying to find out who made the worst bid, N, E or S? South at least has an excuse in that they are expecting their partner to do something over 2h.

[gordontd]

HardVector, on 2019-March-14, 20:33, said:

Are we trying to find out who made the worst bid, N, E or S? South at least has an excuse in that they are expecting their partner to do something over 2h.

Depending on what agreement they have about this situation, South's Pass may well be the correct call.

[blackshoe]

It is legal to ban psyching of artificial bids. Law 40B2{a}{v}.

[pran]

blackshoe, on 2019-March-15, 01:32, said:

It is legal to ban psyching of artificial bids. Law 40B2{a}{v}.

Quite correct.

But the laws are silent about the resulting conflict with law 25A4: What is the position for a player who has misbid an artificial call and does not become aware of this fact until after his partner has subsequently called?

Is he subject to a penalty for psyching in this case? May he violate Law 25A4 and call attention to his misbid anyway?

[TylerE]

Vampyr, on 2019-March-14, 19:28, said:

Too many players are unaware that they can correct a true mispull before partner calls, so I can understand North’s dilemma.

South, however, has made flagrant use of UI, and I would apply a disciplinary penalty of five times the standard amount. Also I would adjust the score but to what I am too tired to work out.

What'd south do? At least here in ACBL-land the most common defense to 2♣ - (banana) is: Pass = GF, X=Bust

So how is S's pass taking advantage of UI? It's the 100% clear systemic bid.

[barmar]

pran, on 2019-March-15, 03:03, said:

But the laws are silent about the resulting conflict with law 25A4: What is the position for a player who has misbid an artificial call and does not become aware of this fact until after his partner has subsequently called?

Nothing allows prohibiting misbids, and AFAIK no RAs try to do so.

However, if a player misbids in the same way repeatedly, it may lead to an implicit partnership understanding. The EBU White Book says that misbids can be recorded like psyches. And if the partner takes action that accomodated the misbid, it would be evidence of such an implicit agreement.

[pran]

barmar, on 2019-March-15, 10:15, said:

Nothing allows prohibiting misbids, and AFAIK no RAs try to do so.

However, if a player misbids in the same way repeatedly, it may lead to an implicit partnership understanding. The EBU White Book says that misbids can be recorded like psyches. And if the partner takes action that accomodated the misbid, it would be evidence of such an implicit agreement.

How do you distinguish between a (once upon a time) misbid and psyche when the psyche is banned by a regulation?

[blackshoe]

You ask the player what he was doing.

[sanst]

pran, on 2019-March-15, 03:03, said:

Quite correct.

But the laws are silent about the resulting conflict with law 25A4: What is the position for a player who has misbid an artificial call and does not become aware of this fact until after his partner has subsequently called?

Is he subject to a penalty for psyching in this case? May he violate Law 25A4 and call attention to his misbid anyway?

Why do you bring up psyching here? It’s an obvious misbid and the point worth discussing is whether S has made use of UI or not, and that depends on their methods and agreements. Unfortunately, we don’t know what these are. Neither do we know what East’s 2♥ means, but, by the look of it, both majors. If that’s the case, I would consider pass the logical call, “Wait and see”.

[pran]

sanst, on 2019-March-16, 03:37, said:

Why do you bring up psyching here? It’s an obvious misbid and the point worth discussing is whether S has made use of UI or not, and that depends on their methods and agreements. Unfortunately, we don’t know what these are. Neither do we know what East’s 2♥ means, but, by the look of it, both majors. If that’s the case, I would consider pass the logical call, “Wait and see”.

I didn't bring it up, it was brought up in OP.

And the laws define psyche as "a deliberate and gross misstatement of honour strength and/or of suit length".
So the relevant legal question in this case should be whether the (obvious) misbid may be corrected under Law 25A1 or should be considered a psyche subject to possible restrictions under Law 40B2{a}{v}.

Now, if South suspected a genuine and unintended misbid he should have called the Director rather than making a call. That would have kept the door open for North to change his call under Law 25A1.

By passing South apparently "fielded" the misbid as a psyche.

[sanst]

I don’t think you can read in the OP that this was maybe a psych, so there’s no use going that way. As Vampyr wrote: “Too many players are unaware that they can correct a true mispull before partner calls”. And yes, N should have called the director, but probably thought that it wouldn’t make any difference. The only relevant question to answer is “Did or didn’t S used the UI from N” and without information about their agreements and the meaning of the 2♥ bid (was that alerted and/or explained?) I can’t answer that and I doubt whether you or anybody else can.

[pran]

sanst, on 2019-March-16, 06:39, said:

I don’t think you can read in the OP that this was maybe a psych, so there’s no use going that way. As Vampyr wrote: “Too many players are unaware that they can correct a true mispull before partner calls”. And yes, N should have called the director, but probably thought that it wouldn’t make any difference. The only relevant question to answer is “Did or didn’t S used the UI from N” and without information about their agreements and the meaning of the 2♥ bid (was that alerted and/or explained?) I can’t answer that and I doubt whether you or anybody else can.

From OP:

dickiegera, on 2019-March-14, 14:26, said:

[...]
I am not complaining about the result
I do know that one is not allowed to psych a 2♣ opener, however what if the 2♣
bid was a mistaken bid that was not corrected?

[sanst]

So, does it say that the poster thinks it might have been a psych? Not in my book. Het just states a fact, i.e, in this jurisdiction you’re not allowed to psych a strong 2♣. And he asks what should be done if it was a mistaken, not corrected bid. That’s the question in hand and that should be answered.

[BudH]

TylerE, on 2019-March-15, 09:43, said:

What'd south do? At least here in ACBL-land the most common defense to 2♣ - (banana) is: Pass = GF, X=Bust

So how is S's pass taking advantage of UI? It's the 100% clear systemic bid.

But was South's pass alerted?

If South had realized by that point he had accidentally opened 2♣, he is required to alert as if he had intended to open 2♣. (Plus, he can't change his call once South passes.)

[barmar]

BudH, on 2019-March-16, 10:07, said:

But was South's pass alerted?

If South had realized by that point he had accidentally opened 2♣, he is required to alert as if he had intended to open 2♣. (Plus, he can't change his call once South passes.)

Is forcing pass over partner's 2♣ is alertable? I'm not sure it is.

[blackshoe]

The alert procedure says "Passes or redoubles with highly unusual or unexpected meanings require an Alert." I don't think this pass qualifies.

[Vampyr]

pran, on 2019-March-15, 11:31, said:

How do you distinguish between a (once upon a time) misbid and psyche when the psyche is banned by a regulation?

Best not to distinguish them. There is no reasonable alternative.

[pran]

pran, on 2019-March-15, 11:31, said:

How do you distinguish between a (once upon a time) misbid and psyche when the psyche is banned by a regulation?

Vampyr, on 2019-March-16, 17:15, said:

Best not to distinguish them. There is no reasonable alternative.

That is exactly why I am uncomfortable with Law 40B2{a}{v}

Shall Law 25 or (a regulation under) Law 40B2{a}{v} prevail in this case?

(Law 40B2{a}{v} is "more specific" but cannot apply unless you rule that the call in question is a psyche rather than an ordinary misbid)