[DozyDom]

Relatively inexperienced player from EBUland here with a question about rectification after a psyche seems to have been fielded.

Context:
Playing in a teams match, my partner and I (cough cough my partner cough cough) mess up our doubles and let ops escape for -500 when we have a cold slam. We go back to our teammates expecting to lose a game swing at least (we're vulnerable and the slam isn't hard to find), but find it's only a loss of 6 IMPs - our teammates' ops were in 3NT+4. It turns out this is probably only because my good friend Jack psyched 1NT in the first hand on a 0 count. Now, his partner had 12 points, but quietly passed over 3NT despite "knowing" it was bid on 13-11 points.

Shockingly enough, our opponents rather thought he was fielding; he denies it and I'm tempted to believe him because he's a very persuasive person and occasionally daydreams. However, if he is believed to have been fielding (there was no TD there at the time and the league appeals process is quite slow), the EBU's regulations seem to suggest there's no rectification or penalty to be had because we still lost the board. Is this right? And if so, should it be right?

[gordontd]

If a psyche is fielded but the pair do not gain from it, the table result stands but they get a procedural penalty for it.

Quote

White Book 1.4.4 Scoring a Fielded Psyche or Deviation
If the TD judges a psyche or deviation is amber or green, then there is no adjustment, unless
there are two amber cases, see §1.4.2.4.
After the board is completed the TD may judge a psyche or deviation is red. If their opponents
have a 60% score or better, or have gained 3 IMPs or more, the result stands unchanged.
Otherwise, the result is cancelled, and the board re-scored as average plus to the opponents,
average minus to the pair. Normally this translates as 3 IMPs, or 60%/40%.
If it is a red psyche then an additional procedural penalty will be applied. Normally it will be the
minimum standard though a TD may increase this. In a Victory Point event, the normal penalty
is 0.5 VP. Otherwise it is 10% or 2 IMPs, so the board is generally scored as 60%/30% or 5 IMPs.
See also §2.8.3.3.

[DozyDom]

gordontd, on 2018-April-10, 08:49, said:

If a psyche is fielded but the pair do not gain from it, the table result stands but they get a procedural penalty for it.

Oh, I see. I must have just read the part about table penalties. Thanks!


Still seems a little light though?

[ahydra]

Did you mean to say "13-11" points? If it's 11-13, then there might be some argument for pass with a bad 12; but if it's meant to say e.g. 13-15 then that's most definitely a field and deserves the PP 100%.

I think just the PP is reasonable when the opponents haven't been damaged. Obviously if the pair in question start racking up PPs, the TD may take some further action.

ahydra

[Vampyr]

DozyDom, on 2018-April-10, 08:39, said:

However, if he is believed to have been fielding (there was no TD there at the time and the league appeals process is quite slow), the EBU's regulations seem to suggest there's no rectification or penalty to be had because we still lost the board. Is this right? And if so, should it be right?

Were you playing point-a-board? If not, what does “lost the board” mean?

[WellSpyder]

Vampyr, on 2018-April-10, 19:00, said:

Were you playing point-a-board? If not, what does “lost the board” mean?

I wondered that, too, when I first read the post. But if you read the regulation which Gordon has posted you will see that the score is not adjusted if the offending side lose 3 imps or more, so in this context that seems a reasonable interpretation of "losing the board".

[DozyDom]

ahydra, on 2018-April-10, 18:01, said:

Did you mean to say "13-11" points? If it's 11-13, then there might be some argument for pass with a bad 12; but if it's meant to say e.g. 13-15 then that's most definitely a field and deserves the PP 100%.

I think just the PP is reasonable when the opponents haven't been damaged. Obviously if the pair in question start racking up PPs, the TD may take some further action.

ahydra

I'm afraid I meant the NT is strong and ops have 11-13 points between them...

[DozyDom]

WellSpyder, on 2018-April-11, 02:08, said:

I wondered that, too, when I first read the post. But if you read the regulation which Gordon has posted you will see that the score is not adjusted if the offending side lose 3 imps or more, so in this context that seems a reasonable interpretation of "losing the board".

Yes, that's the one. Apologies for not making it clearer.

[pescetom]

DozyDom, on 2018-April-10, 09:48, said:

Still seems a little light though?

If "fielding" means what I take it to mean (player somehow recognises his partner's call as a psyche and takes advantage) then it seems incredibly light.

[Vampyr]

WellSpyder, on 2018-April-11, 02:08, said:

I wondered that, too, when I first read the post. But if you read the regulation which Gordon has posted you will see that the score is not adjusted if the offending side lose 3 imps or more, so in this context that seems a reasonable interpretation of "losing the board".

Well, if you were booked to lose 8 IMPs and by fielding you lost 3, i would describe it as winning the board. In fact, the 30% you would get in a Pairs game may be an improvement on the score you would have received if you hadn’t fielded.

The trouble with receiving a second “amber card” is that there is usually no method to records psyches or to learn of past ones.

[WellSpyder]

Vampyr, on 2018-April-11, 20:05, said:

Well, if you were booked to lose 8 IMPs and by fielding you lost 3, i would describe it as winning the board. In fact, the 30% you would get in a Pairs game may be an improvement on the score you would have received if you hadn’t fielded.

How do you know what would have happened on the board without a fielded psyche?

[steve2005]

You didn't dive auction. Maybe Jack's partner believed them more than Jack.
In any case I don't know how anyone can give more than a general answer without the hand, bidding and state of the match.

Plus you have some probable typos which a diagram would help clear up.

[Vampyr]

WellSpyder, on 2018-April-16, 08:03, said:

How do you know what would have happened on the board without a fielded psyche?

Some situations are obvious, like you didn’t bid game or you pulled a penalty double etc. Others can be derived from the normal actions according to your methods.

[WellSpyder]

Vampyr, on 2018-April-17, 08:09, said:

Some situations are obvious, like you didn’t bid game or you pulled a penalty double etc. Others can be derived from the normal actions according to your methods.

Maybe I have got a bit confused about exactly what we are discussing here, but I'm not sure it is as simple as that. My understanding is that fielded psyches are ruled against on the basis that they demonstrate a concealed partnership understanding, and therefore an illegal method. So the relevant question is "what would have happened without the illegal method?" This means without the psyche, as well as without the subsequent bid that reveals the CPU. If that is right, then I don't think your examples really cover the situation, and it is much harder to work out what would have happened without this method.

[barmar]

It would help if we were given the full auction. But it sounds like his partner opened 1NT, then the opponents bid naturally up to 3NT. Their strong bidding may have exposed the psych, not any CPU. But if his partner has a history of opening 1NT with zero counts, that could create an implicit agreement, and predispose him to believing the opponents rather than his partner.

But it still seems hard to blame their failing to find slam on the psych. The psych told them they were missing 11-13 HCP, and it turns out to be true, but the missing points were in the other opponent's hand, not opener's. Although I suppose this might affect their estimation of the value of particular honors -- finesses will have to go the other way than initially assumed.