[blml] A Psyche Classification

[John Probst]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Guthrie" <guthrie at ntlworld.com>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] A Psyche Classification


> [Roger Pewick]
> One of the consequences of a system such as green-amber-red is that it
> manufactures something to do.  you have this rule- and to satisfy it
> you have to do something, and someone else has to do something, and
> you pay  attention to it instead of taking care of business, and as
> with most things that are done, people get it wrong, and a lot of
> people put in a lot of effort to undo the wrong, and all this time
> people are distracted from taking care of business.
>
> Maybe the point of the rule is to give players something to do that
> will distract them from taking care of business.  In 1959 Victor Mollo
> made such  a point in his book, Bridge Psychology.
>
> [nige1]
> IMO, the EBU colour-coding of psychs is an excellent protocol that we
> look forward to being incorporated in the new edition of TFLB.
>
> Other jurisdictions seem to tolerate CPUs (at one extreme) or ban
> psychs for all practical purposes (the other extreme). The EBU
> protocol seems ideal: it allows real psychs but deters CPU and UI.

Nigel, here I must agree with you. I've snipped some of your points but they 
are well found.
 My case has been that there is no evidence of a CPU and that pass is 
entirely normal and reasonable. I just don't get involved in auctions where 
trumps are breaking 4-1 (or possibly 4-0), when opponents haven't yet worked 
out if they have a minor game or not and when I know they have game values. 
That a bridge player playing with a "blind" partner may well suspect all is 
not kosher is beside the point; I have no reason to suspect a psyche, and 
even playing with DALB (who we must assume never psyches) would still pass. 
john