[blml] Is this a psych?

[Grattan Endicott]

Grattan Endicott
grandeval at vejez.fsnet .co.uk
[also gesta at tiscali.co.uk]
**********************
"Everything for ther best in the best
 of all possible worlds. "
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alain Gottcheiner" <agot at ulb.ac.be>
To: "Robert Geller" <geller at nifty.com>; <blml at rtflb.org>
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 8:24 AM
Subject: Re: [blml] Is this a psych?


> Nope. 2NT is an asking bid ; it doesn't tell anything ; 
> the fact that it should usually be strong is common bridge 
> knowledge, not convention. Contrast with transfers, 
> which show a suit. If I want to ask partner his strength 
> on a hand where I don't care (e.g. via checkback Stayman), 
> nobody may disallow it.
> 
> Of course, if this happens more than once, the fact that 
> 2NT isn't necessarily strong should be disclosed, as it is 
> unusual (in the same way as non-major-oriented Stayman 
> should).
> 
+=+ Proper disclosure is the key. If it is the case that there 
is a partnership agreement, arrived at implicitly by repetition, 
that the bid may be weak, this must be disclosed in the 
manner required by the SO. Otherwise the 'psyche', baby or
not, is based upon an undisclosed partnership understanding.
Whether damage occurs through a failure to disclose in any 
instance is a matter of bridge judgement (which may well 
take into account the class of player against whom it is made). 
                                            ~ Grattan ~   +=+