[mr1303]

Last night I agreed to play with a partner whom I haven't played with for quite a while. The reason I no longer play with him is because he has this tendency to try to be deceptive on almost every board.

Some examples:

---

---

Apart from getting up and leaving, what should I do in a situation like that? I've posted this in the laws forum because I'm particularly interested in the legal aspects of the situation.

[chrism]

Scrupulously believe all his calls, alert the opponents of partner's tendencies, call the director if his bidding rises (sinks?) to the level of frivolous psyching, and renew your vow not to play with him again unless you want a session on the wild side.

[billw55]

I think you had the right solution the first time

During this session, I think pre-alert each pair that your partner often psyches. Maybe he will get the message.

[gwnn]

Who was he on board 2? There were plenty of strange calls on that hand.

3D on the first hand is probably the worst call I have ever seen on these forums.

[Bbradley62]

I agree with billw... also, explain to partner why you will no longer play with him after last night's session.

[ArtK78]

gwnn, on 2013-September-17, 06:37, said:

Who was he on board 2? There were plenty of strange calls on that hand.

3D on the first hand is probably the worst call I have ever seen on these forums.

I don't think there were "plenty" of strange calls on the second board. Two, certainly. Three if you really don't like South's negative double. And I am not counting North's penalty double as strange as it was the winning action.

Obviously the 1♠ overcall is a psyche.

The negative double on 6-5 may not be everyone's cup of tea, but at least the meaning of the bid is consistent with the hand - I have the unbid suits.

2♦ by West is certainly the right call - limit raise or better.

3♦ by North can't really be questioned.

Pass by East is certainly appropriate.

South's pass of 3♦ is strange. If you are going to make a negative double on 6-5, it must be with the intention of bidding the 6 card suit later. And, in fact, NS are cold for 4♥.

West's 3♠ bid is certainly normal opposite a human being. Perhaps he should be wary about bidding 3♠ opposite this partner. But the opps did pass the hand out in 3♦, so 3♠ doesn't seem unreasonable. [Did East's 1♠ overcall win the board until West bid 3♠? Who knows.]

North's double of 3♠ was certainly the winning action, although it doesn't seem obvious to me.

So, there were a couple of strange calls, but at least West and North were solid citizens. South made a judgment to treat his hand like 4-5 in the rounded suits instead of 6-5, which is strange. And East is beyond the pale.

[gwnn]

We are getting off-topic here, but I certainly like 1S much more than the double. The point of my post was just the question. I don't consider 1S super-strange (definitely not a psyche), although I wouldn't do it on this particular hand. AQJx of spades, yes. I don't think we need to analyse all of the calls in turn, but if you insist: I was referring to 1S, X, S's pass of 3D and X from N. These are 4 calls, that constitutes 'plenty' in my eyes. I hope this justification is enough for the purposes of this thread and I do not need to explain myself further.

[Zelandakh]

The first board is really a crime. If you can stand playing with this partner again then tell him that if he must mess about, only do it when he knows the hand belongs to the opponents and when there is not another call that perfectly describes the hand. Here partner opened and he held a good raise after a takeout double. Not really much point in having 2NT in the bidding box if you do not bring it out now is there?

I have much more sympathy with the second action. Here he knows the opps are likely to have game and possibly even slam. So throwing in a nuisance bid is ok. Not well thought through, since it does not take up any space, but at least this one has some potential upside.

If you really cannot cope with the shenanigens any more then another option beyong simply saying no would be appealing to his ego. You might tell him that it is unfair of him to use these tactics on such weak opponents and he should save this for when he plays against better quality opposition. Hopefully you can then extricate yourself before he suggests going to a major event together...

[wank]

ArtK78, on 2013-September-17, 09:00, said:

Obviously the 1♠ overcall is a psyche.

eh?

[barmar]

Typical agreements for a 1-level overcall are 8+ HCP and a 5-card suit, occasionally a good 4-card suit. He only has 5 HCP, and hardly anyone would consider the suit quality good enough for a 4-card overcall (although it's not nonsensical for lead direction purposes) Maybe if it only had one of these flaws it would just be a "baby" psyche, but in combination I think it's a real psyche, and I'll bet he intended it as such.

[wank]

barmar, on 2013-September-17, 15:11, said:

Typical agreements for a 1-level overcall are 8+ HCP and a 5-card suit

that's where you've gone wrong. you've projected your standards onto someone else. A 4 card suit and 5 points are both perfectly in range for me. i can assure you that if you're watching the bermuda bowl you'll see people overcall on much worse than this.

[Trinidad]

wank, on 2013-September-17, 16:28, said:

that's where you've gone wrong. you've projected your standards onto someone else. A 4 card suit and 5 points are both perfectly in range for me. i can assure you that if you're watching the bermuda bowl you'll see people overcall on much worse than this.

I wouldn't consider 3 card suits with 3 points much worse.

Rik

[mr1303]

Partner was East on both. NS were not very good opponents.

[ArtK78]

wank, on 2013-September-17, 16:28, said:

that's where you've gone wrong. you've projected your standards onto someone else. A 4 card suit and 5 points are both perfectly in range for me. i can assure you that if you're watching the bermuda bowl you'll see people overcall on much worse than this.

Not from a respected player.

[helene_t]

The first one I have seen a couple of time, intended as fourth suit forcing (!) by some gozilla. It makes no sense to make that call with the intention to deceive although it might be made with the intention to punish partner or to dump.

The second one is just a matter of style. A somewhat extreme style but probably more intended to direct a spade lead than to mislead opps (or partner).

[billw55]

ArtK78, on 2013-September-17, 19:39, said:

Not from a respected player.

Hm, there are non-respected players in the Bermuda Bowl?

[ArtK78]

billw55, on 2013-September-18, 06:33, said:

Hm, there are non-respected players in the Bermuda Bowl?

Everything is relative.

[barmar]

wank, on 2013-September-17, 16:28, said:

that's where you've gone wrong. you've projected your standards onto someone else. A 4 card suit and 5 points are both perfectly in range for me. i can assure you that if you're watching the bermuda bowl you'll see people overcall on much worse than this.

This is your partnership agreement? Does any jurisdiction allow such flimsy overcalls without alerting?

FYI, ACBL requires pre-alerts of very aggressive methods, which includes "overcalls with fewer than 6 HCP at the one level".

[paulg]

barmar, on 2013-September-18, 10:38, said:

This is your partnership agreement? Does any jurisdiction allow such flimsy overcalls without alerting?

FYI, ACBL requires pre-alerts of very aggressive methods, which includes "overcalls with fewer than 6 HCP at the one level".

No pre-alerts in the EBU, just needs to be on the system card. But most of us know what's coming, it's 'just bridge'.

[gnasher]

mr1303, on 2013-September-17, 05:05, said:

getting up and leaving

That's definitely not an option.