Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Richard Willey
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is gratifying that the ACBL was able to switch over before Fall Nationals… (And more gratifying that they were willing to use tech developed outside the US)

With this said and done, it should be noted that that program that required 50 computers running for up to an hour requires seconds if run on Amazon web services.
Nov. 18, 2016
Richard Willey edited this comment Nov. 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Given that you had never heard of this psyche in your 20 years of playing, it seems strange that you now have such such strong opinions about the frequency with which other pairs make use of this. You might do a bit better to sit back and learn about how things actually work before taking a strong advocacy position.

For example:

> So it sure sounds like that type of bid is a psych 90%
> of the time or more, regardless of whether it is made
> in an established partnership or not.

Here's an alternative explanation: Psyches are memorable.

When folks make one against you and you get burned, you remember it. When you perpetrate one and it scores well (or alternatively if it blows up in your face) you remember it.

> Consequently it seems to me that this particular type of psych
> should be announced/alerted ALL the time.

If you like, I will be happy to alert each and every bid that gets made in my partnerships. Of, course, this does cause a problem, since alerting 100% of all bids conveys the precise same amount of information of alerting zero % of all bids. However, at least we'll all get the joy of saying “alert” alot.

FWIW, the ACBL convention cards used to have a section where folks could disclose psyches. They decided to remove this.
Nov. 14, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is one of the more encouraging article that I have read recently.
Good job!
Nov. 10, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
More importantly, the Bulletin goes to ACBL members…

Kinda useless as a recruiting tool.
Nov. 4, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> So, by the way, who decides what constitutes a ‘basic
> element of the game’ and what does not?

The folks who wrote Law 40C of the Rules of Duplicate Bridge

> I have been playing competitive bridge for 20+ years. I have
> earned most of my points in club play, but I only play in open,
> stratified games at decent sized, city bridge clubs, with a
> reasonable mix of A, B and C level players.

> But (and this is absolutely true) the experience I described
> at the start of this thread was the VERY FIRST TIME I have
> EVER encountered a deliberate psych bid. So does that mean
> that I have just been lucky (or unlucky, depending on your
> viewpoint) to have avoided this ‘basic element of the game’
> for so long?

It means that you swim in a very small pond…

> Have all the A level players that I have played against over the
> years been equally unaware of this ‘basic element’ since they
> haven’t tried it out on me?

Many people have a set of personal aesthetics such that they are disinclined to psyche.
Some of them confuse these aesthetics with the actual rules of the game.

> So the question becomes, how well-known does a ‘Well-Known’
> psych have to be before it ceases to be a psych and becomes an
> implicit agreement, and therefore subject to the ACBL announcement
> rules.

I have personally see Zia pysch a white on red “weak” NT opening on a balanced 7-9 count on three occasions. (Once F2F, two other times on Vugraph). He is notorious for this as well as a number of other “well known psyches”.

Some officials within the ACBL launched a semi successful crusade to ban psyches in North America. They pretty much failed, however, they were successful in creating a fair amount of confusion about the actual laws.
Nov. 2, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> From my perspective, one of the best things I have
> found is the following link about psyching from
> Larry Cohen's website:

This would be the same Larry Cohen who has argued that North American internationals need to be protected against Polish Club because its too much work to prepare…
Oct. 31, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> Clearly most if not all of the contributors
> to this thread (other than yours truly) are
> experienced players, well versed in making
> and defending against psych bids

Its pretty damn sad when someone starts their post stating that they are a “Life Master” and then tries to claim that their lack of experience with basic elements of the game should grant them some kind of special dispensation.
Oct. 31, 2016
Richard Willey edited this comment Nov. 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Or, you might consider that

1. Not that many people in you target audience read newspapers

2. The folks at the University sure as hell will and might not appreciate the publicity
Oct. 30, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Congratulations

Very glad that it worked out so smoothly and easily
Oct. 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Fair enough

From my perspective, if LHO has opened 1NT and RHO has made a stayman type bid, my main goal is not to see us doubled.

Jump bids need to show real offensive potential
Low level bids should be non forcing

Bidding 3S shows: I am willing to play at the 3 level Spades or the 4 level in either minor
Bidding 3H shows: I am willing to play at the 3 level in Hearts or (3S or 4m)
Bidding 3D shows: I am willing to play 3D or 3 of either major
Bidding 3C is once again pass or correct

2NT is probably best reserved as some kind of strong bid
2M = pass or correct once again

This leaves us with Pass, XX, and 2D

I would be tempted to use XX to show short Diamonds

If partner later needs to show Diamonds and gets doubled, you are then well positioned to scramble.

At this point in time, you pretty much are left with balanced hands.
You might want to separate these by strength

Strong balanced hands start with a pass
Weak balanced hands bid 2D
Oct. 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rule number one: This is a puppet, not a relay
Oct. 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When you are a beginner / intermediate who is competing in a game of skill, it is highly commendable that you search out the best talent available to measure yourself against.

It is much less commendable when you demand that these individuals compromise their own level of play / enjoyment of the game to cater to your lack of experience/skill.
Oct. 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
FWIW, I think that folks are approaching this in completely the wrong way.

I don't believe for a minute that the impetus for this decision has anything to do with gambling. I think that some religious nuts wanted to get card playing banned and seized on gambling as a pretext. All these discussions about “games of skill”, “gambling” and the like really aren't particularly relevant.

The important issue are

1. The university has made a decision and isn't going to want to be forced to reverse itself

2. Universities are (pretty much) self governing which means that they can do whatever they damn well please. (I suggest that folks familiarize themselves with the ways in which Universities deal with sex assault and drug possession and compare this to the normal judicial system)

3. If you want to make the university reverse itself, you're going to need to convince them that it is more expensive / unpleasant for them to continue down this road than to continue with what they are doing. (Personally, I don't think that you have a credible threat)

With luck I am wrong and a dispassionate presentation of the facts will prove convincing…
Oct. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> The whole skill versus chance issue is a red herring.

Agreed. I think that the real issue is that you have some Jesus freaks who have their panties all atwist over the thought that someone is playing cards…
Oct. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, it means that Universities will often misinterprete the law…
Oct. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> I am guessing, but it seems to me likely
> that the university would not allow a
> bridge club to meet anywhere on its
> premises or use any connection to
> the university in its name.

I would be surprised if the university were to ban a group of students from using its facilities.

Not sure about the naming. (Universities are often protective about such things) At the same time, who really cares?
Oct. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have belonged to plenty of campus clubs that were recognized by various universities and a bunch of others that were. Practically speaking, the only difference is that clubs that are officially recognized have the right to petition the university for $$$. (Hence my question to Brian about the amount of funding they are receiving). If the club isn't getting money then “official” recognition seems more of a cosmetic issue than a serious one.

I will note in passing that the conditions of contest for the ACBL's collegiate championships make it clear that eligibility is based on enrollment.
Oct. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think that the University's argument is ridiculous, however, at the end of the day you need to decide whether the benefits from winning this fight is worth the cost.

Is the college denying you the use of facilities like meeting rooms?
Are you losing significant amounts of funding?
Oct. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This assumes that the set of continuations that one would play after an illegal LOB system is measurable different than the one that one would play after a legal system.

I don't believe that this can be proven, especially if we are willing to assume that the offending side is trying to conceal the use of an illegal system.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think that one can prove that Justin and Kevin were playing a HUM. However, the methodology that you are proposing seems flawed at best.
Oct. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
MOSCITO
Oct. 20, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top