[blml] Is this apsyche?

[Laszlo Hegedus]

Jeff Easterson wrote:

>Ciao blmlers!  It seems to me that it simply depends on what you are 
>playing and what the 2NT bid means in the partnership.  (If this is so 
>then we have really wasted a lot of time and words on this.)  An 
>example: although I usually don't play 2diam. multi we do have a few 
>other similar opening bids which can have more than one meaning.  We use 
>the lowest relay to enquire, ask for a description of the opening.  The 
>relay is not forcing, is generally weak and the reply of partner can be 
>passed.  We use 2NT (when unpassed) as a forcing bid, promising at least 
>opening count, forcing for at least one round.  If I were to bid 2NT in 
>such a sequence with a weak hand it would be a psyche as far as I 
>understand the term.  My partner will have alerted my bid and described 
>it (if asked) as forcing, at least an opening, at least invitational to 
>game (depending on the further description of opener's hand).  Is there 
>anyone out there who doesn't believe it would be a psyche if I made the 
>bid with a weak hand, intending to pass anything partner replied, to 
>keep the opponents out of game?
>If, on the other hand, the 2NT bid doesn't promise anything and merely 
>asks the partner to further describe his holding, and is so described; 
>then it is hard to see how it could be a psyche.
>Returning to the starting point (the original question): we could have 
>saved a lot of time and words had we simply asked the originator of this 
>just exactly what he played and how the bid was described in his system. 
>  (But then, in retrospect, I doubt that it is in the interest of many 
>of the active blmlersout there to save time and words.)  Ciao, JE
>  
>
OK. It seems to me you are right, but it generates other questions. 
Suppose there are two pairs in the same competition who plays very 
similar systems with only a little difference. They play multi 2D, with 
2N relay for suit and strength.

In pair#1's system it shows good hand: minimum invitational to game, 
according to the strength of the 2D. It makes the situation forcing only 
after partner's positiv anwser but it promises strength, so the opener 
will double or compete with weak hands as well, if his cards are right 
to those bids.

In pair#2's system it promises nothing, just asks partner's hand, but 
can be weak. It does not make the situation forcing, so the 2D opener 
very rarely double or compete after opps overcall on higher level.

Of course, if a member of one of these pairs bids 2N with weak hand 
after partner's 2D opening, then the player of pair#1 psyches, the other 
one doesn't. But you are sitting at the table as opponent of them, you 
see the bidding 2D-P-2N and all the four players tell you "forcing 
relay" in this situation, and you don't know which tipe of the "forcing 
relay" they play. In this situation, after opps explanation an 
information is missing to you. Are these explanations correct? There are 
4 logocal anwsers.


A, pair#1's explanation is correct: "forcing relay", but pair#2's 
explanation is insufficient, they should have tell you something like 
that: "forcing relay, but does not promis good hand".

B, pair#2's explanation is correct: "forcing relay", but pair#1's 
explanation is insufficient, they should have tell you something like 
that: "forcing relay, promises good hand".

C, both expalanation are insufficient.

D, both are correct, if you need more information, you should ask more.


In my bridge experience i founded that pair#2's system is bad and the 
majority does not play like that, so my anwser is the A, but it's only 
my opinion.

regards
Laci