[lamford]

---

Your bid. Clearly one or more of the other players does not have his bid. Double would be takeout.

[pescetom]

What would 4NT be?

[lamford]

pescetom, on 2025-April-22, 06:26, said:

What would 4NT be?

I think the minors.

[hrothgar]

Interesting hand

Opposite a normal 1NT overcall, I think that our best option is to defend 4♠X, but I'm not sure how to get there from here.
Since X is defined as takeout (which seems like a bad choice), my best hope would be to pass and hope that partner balances with a double

Defending 4♠ undoubled looks pretty bad compared to 5♦ or 5♥

So, I guess that I am stuck bidding 4NT and pulling 5♣ to 5♦

And then when it turns out that partner has a weak hand with a long club suit we'll get an awful score.

[Cyberyeti]

Let me guess, they passed and partner was the psycher ?

[mw64ahw]

Looks like both the ops are psyching! 31+hcp between us. I'll X and don't care whether it's takeout for the reds or penalty

[pescetom]

 hrothgar, on 2025-April-22, 06:47, said:

Opposite a normal 1NT overcall, I think that our best option is to defend 4♠X, but I'm not sure how to get there from here.
Since X is defined as takeout (which seems like a bad choice), my best hope would be to pass and hope that partner balances with a double

Defending 4♠ undoubled looks pretty bad compared to 5♦ or 5♥

So, I guess that I am stuck bidding 4NT and pulling 5♣ to 5♦

My thinking too, unfortunately.
Although the agreement that this is takeout seems so bad that maybe pushing the X card through the table might get the punitive intent across (and cause an interesting Director call by the psyching opponents).

[sanst]

It's essential to trust your partner. We have 31...33 hcp, so it's either slam or a very lucrative double. Double keeps all options open, unless you have an agreement that pass is forcing here.
I certainly don't like X as take out at this level. It should be optional whether partner passes or bids.
If my partner is psyching, it should be the first time and I would make it abundantly clear that's the last time as well.
I wouldn't be surprised if W is psyching, ready to run to 5♧ when doubled. But we are not letting them getting away with that.

[hrothgar]

pescetom, on 2025-April-22, 10:10, said:

My thinking too, unfortunately.
Although the agreement that this is takeout seems so bad that maybe pushing the X card through the table might get the punitive intent across (and cause an interesting Director call by the psyching opponents).

What I don't understand is why you'd want the double of 4♠ defined as takeout?

4♥? That might make sense.
But after 4♠, 4NT is available for takeout

[jillybean]

BBO bridge and West is punishing his partner for a bad score on the last board?

X but this is silly bridge.

[sanst]

I've no idea shat this has to do with Laws and Rulings. Please lamford - missed you a while - can you explain?

[hrothgar]

sanst, on 2025-April-23, 03:34, said:

I've no idea shat this has to do with Laws and Rulings. Please lamford - missed you a while - can you explain?

I would imagine that Lamford is starting with a poll and then will get to the actual question with respect to the ruling

[lamford]

hrothgar, on 2025-April-23, 04:40, said:

I would imagine that Lamford is starting with a poll and then will get to the actual question with respect to the ruling

There was no ruling and no TD call, although there might have been. The player passed and the opponents played in 4S+2. Slam is cold for them. If you double, you know one of an opponent or partner will run. Probably to clubs, so you never get to defend 4Sx. If you double, or bid 4NT, partner pulls to 5D which is one off - he has none xx JTxxxxx xxxx. I think one should play double as penalties, but partner will pull anyway, so it makes no difference.

[sanst]

 lamford, on 2025-April-24, 08:13, said:

There was no ruling and no TD call, although there might have been. The player passed and the opponents played in 4S+2. Slam is cold for them. If you double, you know one of an opponent or partner will run. Probably to clubs, so you never get to defend 4Sx. If you double, or bid 4NT, partner pulls to 5D which is one off - he has none xx JTxxxxx xxxx. I think one should play double as penalties, but partner will pull anyway, so it makes no difference.

I don't see an infraction, just a psych that did what it should do: keep NS out off slam. Of course NS are not amused, but a psych is no misdemeanor.

[shyams]

sanst, on 2025-April-24, 09:05, said:

I don't see an infraction, just a psych that did what it should do: keep NS out off slam. Of course NS are not amused, but a psych is no misdemeanor.

A player passed holding 16 HCP and 4441 shape even as his partner overcalled 1NT. How can that not be an infraction?

[axman]

shyams, on 2025-April-24, 10:05, said:

A player passed holding 16 HCP and 4441 shape even as his partner overcalled 1NT. How can that not be an infraction?

There was no UI.

[lamford]

shyams, on 2025-April-24, 10:05, said:

A player passed holding 16 HCP and 4441 shape even as his partner overcalled 1NT. How can that not be an infraction?

40A3. A player may make any call or play without prior announcement provided that such call or play is not based on an undisclosed partnership understanding.

In addition, both the mooted bids, Double and 4NT, lead to a BETTER result for the psyching side, even if the final contract is 6Dx.

[sanst]

As I wrote, I absolutely trust my partner. If (s)he puts 1NT on the table, by agreement 15...17 hcp, more or less balanced, with 16 hcp I won't pass after 4♤ from west. As said, I would suspect W of psyching, ready to run to 5♧ when doubled, but even so I wouldn't pass.
If N passes in this situation, I have no doubt that that is based on the assumption or even knowledge that S is psyching. That can only be based on past experience, therefore an implicit, undisclosed and illegal understanding. This certainly deserves a penalty.
That the result of passing is worse than doubling or 4NT, is a form of bridge devine retribution, but that's no reason to let the passing go unpunished.

[hrothgar]

sanst, on 2025-April-25, 06:09, said:

If N passes in this situation, I have no doubt that that is based on the assumption or even knowledge that S is psyching. That can only be based on past experience, therefore an implicit, undisclosed and illegal understanding. This certainly deserves a penalty.

What is this occurred in a first time partnership?
Would you still advance this claim?

I hope not.

[sanst]

 hrothgar, on 2025-April-25, 06:33, said:

What is this occurred in a first time partnership?
Would you still advance this claim?

I hope not.

In a first time partnership??? You don't believe that, do you? Quite by accident S psyches a 1NT overcall and N, with 16 hcp passes after 4♤ from W because of what? Gut feeling? Inspration by some higher power? I don't buy that, not in a million years.