[ArtK78]

I have said it before, and I will say it again.

If there is a bad result occurs one member of the partnership psyches, the blame is on the psycher no matter what happened after the psyche.

[phil_20686]

paulg, on 2012-April-23, 04:20, said:

If this were said to a director or AC, pretty sure they would feel it was fielding.

I wasn't suggesting you admit your guilt....

There seem to be enough reasonable bridge reasons to bid 4H that if you are going to rule this as fielding without an admission, you are basically just ruling against every psyche that turns out ok. I mean the principle here seems to be that some people who dont know anything about your style, system or continuations might have bid differently, and that would have turned out worse, so better rule fielded misbid. Just seems bizarre to me.

You are allowed to psyche. You are allowed to get lucky when you do.

[rmnka447]

With a second psyche of 4 ♦, there probably isn't a director anywhere who wouldn't adjust the result.

Unless bridge logic tells you that a psyche has occurred, psycher's partner can't make any call that could be interpreted as fielding the psyche. With with opener's hand, a more aggressive move toward slam would be almost certain -- bidding slam directly or possibly using RKCB.

The burden of proof that a psyche hasn't been fielded lies with psycher and psycher's partner. In the US, this result would be adjusted. If the director decided the psyching was egregious enough, a further penalty might be made. That's because fielding a psyche without bridge logic to tell you a psyche has occurred is a tacit illegal partnership agreement. In this hand, opener has no reason to believe his partner's bids aren't real. Based on the bidding, slam is almost certain.

[c_corgi]

rmnka447, on 2012-April-23, 07:21, said:

With a second psyche of 4 ♦, there probably isn't a director anywhere who wouldn't adjust the result.

What difference does the 2nd psyche make? FWIW it seems like an attempt to mastermind rather than psyche: he is not trying to misrepresent his holding, but to manipulate partner into cuebidding hearts.

[c_corgi]

gnasher, on 2012-April-22, 04:04, said:

However, the regulations don't actually say that fielding it is illegal. Hence, according to a strict reading of the rules, you're allowed to intentionally field a psyche, as long as there's no agreement about psyching. If you can cater for the psyche without appearing to do so, that seems to be a legitimate tactic.

This explains a lot. It seems to me that the fielding is (should be) the offence. Whether something is a partnership understanding or not can be quite tenuous and as Phil suggests, not owning up seems like a robust defence in some situations. The regulations appear to be written in such a way as to enable witch-hunts against psyching/deviating from system and (indirectly) discourage helpful disclosure.

[han]

gnasher, on 2012-April-22, 04:04, said:

The score is adjusted if your actions appear to cater for a psyche.

According to the regulations (which are worth reading just for entertainment), intent isn't taken into account. If you do something that "provides evidence" of an agreement (explicit or implicit) that partner might psyche, they cancel the board and replace it with 60-30 or the equivalent.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think that there will be a ruling against a 4H cue here because it fields a psyche. You need a pretty sick mind to bid 4H just in case partner psyched.

[gnasher]

paulg, on 2012-April-23, 04:20, said:

If this were said to a director or AC, pretty sure they would feel it was fielding.

You're probably right, but I'd like to think that the director or committee members would read the regulations and then follow them. The words "intent will not be taken into account" seem pretty clear to me.