Psyche / fielding a psyche
The (hopefully) attached hand was played last night, auction as shown.
The 2N bid wasn't alerted, and when an explanation was requested (through the BBO system, as well as by private message) the bid was flagged as 'No explanation available'. West also accidentally messaged to the table (rather than the opponents) 'Please do not ask for explanation of non alerted bids'.
The question I have to ask is whether anyone has done anything 'wrong' - my feeling is that the psyche is fine (though an explanation or 'no partnership understanding' would have been preferred), though possibly East fielded the psyche by passing out 3H.
Thanks
Comments
OK. I haven't mastered the layout tool that Michael has provided, so I'm relying on basic typing to display the hands and bidding. Apologies for any formatting issues
Board 8 : Dealer West : Love all
West North East South
Pass 1S 2D 2H
2NT Dbl Pass 3H
All Pass
WEST
S Q 6 4 2
H 6 2
D J 7 6 5
C 9 5 3
NORTH
S A J 10 8 5
H A 9 3
D 9
C Q J 8 6
EAST
S 9 7 3
H 7 5
D A K Q 10 3
C A K 2
SOUTH
S K
H K Q J 10 8 4
D 8 4 2
C 10 7 4
Converting this to use the layout tool:
{dwnone ajt85 a93 9 qj86; 973 75 akqt3 ak2; k kqjt84 842 t74; q642 62 j765 953}
{b p1s2d2h 2nxp3h /}
West has to explain a bid if asked, even if non-alerted. The explanation could be something along the lines of "undiscussed", but could equally well be "invite to 3NT" or "to play, not invitational" or something similar, so there are plenty of possible nonalertable meanings that might have to be distinguished from each other.
I think any meaning that could include a hand as weak as West's would be alertable. Thus, if West was adamant that the bid was non-alertable, East has probably fielded a psyche by failing to compete above 3!h and/or to redouble the 2NT bid (assuming that a redouble here would show strength in E/W's system). I'm unsure, though (especially as West is a passed hand) and would probably rule this as amber.
West has not done anything wrong by psyching, although may have done something wrong by providing misinformation. (Did West state that the bid was a psyche, when asked? If not, there's always the possibility that this sequence is somehow systemic, in which case North may have underbid as a consequence of believing West had better hearts and worse diamonds.)
As a side note, North should probably have bid 4!h regardless (the hand becomes much better if partner has real hearts), but this doesn't come anywhere near the standard of an extremely serious error.
And on a related note, but a slightly different subject: I find that when playing online, on the rare occasion I psyche, I'm less likely to volunteer an explanation of a natural bid (although unlike the West here, I will of course explain it when asked); it feels slightly unethical to volunteer an explanation that doesn't match my hand. Is this correct practice, or should I persist in giving explanations that I would otherwise make?
On your last point @ais523, yes you should make explanations for any bid that you would normally give an explanation for, even if it doesn't match your hand. I did raise it as a problem with the current online regulations... I can imagine the opponents getting rather upset in such a case(!), but I don't expect them to change and it is the best way of matching the face-to-face rules to the online rules.