[blml] Is this a psych?

[Laszlo Hegedus]

Herman De Wael wrote:

>Laszlo Hegedus wrote:
>  
>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>IMHO this is a psyche. Psyche is when you do somethig to misinform the 
>>other players at the table.  
>>    
>>
>
>This is a circular reasoning. Misinforming the opponents is when you 
>don't tell them precisely with which hands a certain bid can be done. 
>So this is not a psyche, but misinformation.
>
>  
>
I used the word 'misinform' with its general meaning, which is not the 
same as MI in bridge laws. After pass-pass- NV/V u have 62,432,Q86432,J3 
and you decide to bid 1S, and if your screenmate asks u tell him 
something like '11-22 points, 5+ spades'. There is no MI now, your 
explanation is absolutely correct. But you really misinformed (general 
sense of the word) your opponents (and your partner as well) with your 
psyche.

>>Once my opponent did the following
>>
>>4s pass 4N pass
>>5D pass 5S all pass
>>
>>It went down 4 (NV), but we could have made 7 Diamonds as well (V)
>>I didn't feel, my balanced hand was  strong enough to double, but 
>>partner surely would have bid his long suit after 4S pass pass. The 
>>player who bid the rkc had very weak hand. I think he did well.
>>
>>Did he psyche?
>>4N: rkc. He really asked partners' number of keycards.
>>5S: He really wanted to stop after partner had only 1 of 5 (he would 
>>stop otherwise as well).
>>
>>But if you say it was not a psyche, it sounds very strange for me.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>Again, if you explain it as "asking for aces", there is no 
>misrepresentation. But if you explain it as "asking for aces, 
>guarantees 2 of them himself", there is misinformation. Granted, 
>no-one would explain BW like that, so in this case there is never MI, 
>but in the original, many people believe that 2NT guarantees 
>something. It depends on the environment to know if they are being 
>misinformed or not.
>
>But in both cases, since the object of the bid is the same (asking 
>something from partner without guaranteeing anything), the bid can 
>never be called a psyche, since it does not depart from it's systemic 
>meaning (it does not really have any). It is a tactical bid, and 
>players who are fooled by it should tell themselves they have learnt a 
>lesson and maybe they won't be tricked next time.
>  
>
Ok i see, it's only definition problem. You wrote: it's not a psyche, 
it's a tactical bid ...
Something like: It's not an elephant, it's a huge animal with trunk.
I think psyche is the tactical bid.

Another example: You play no limit poker, you have very poor hand, but 
you bet five times as big amount of money as the pot. You really psyche, 
unless there is no 'bidding system', your bid has promised nothig at 
all. But there is a really big misstatement about the hand you have. Is 
it a psyche or not? Tactical bid only?

regards
Laci