Is this a psych?

writerman

At today's club session, the following occurred, Dealer West, love all:
West: No bid. North: 1 Heart. East: 1 Spade.
This was East's hand:
S: 9865
H: A6
D: K653
C: 852
This was an online session with no convention card available. Would you consider East's overcall a "psych"? If not, is there any further action you would recommend?
My concern is that if overcalls of this nature are repeated, it becomes some sort of implicit agreement.
All opinions gratefully received.

JamesC

Hmm. I'd put this somewhere on the border between a psych and a wild overbid. If the latter then there's possible disclosure issues, since this is a considerably worse suit than the norm for such an action. If a psych, it's legal, but fielding it isn't, and I'd review the final auction in this light. Even if there's no fielding I might well opt to record the hand due to the risk this is an illicit agreement.

gordonrainsford

I would start by asking the player why they made the bid. Maybe they were confused about the auction and thought they were responder. If not and it was a deliberate bid, we need to know if the player (and partner) thought it was a departure from their agreements or in line with them.

writerman

It wasn't fielded but kept the opponents out of the 3NT that was the result for the rest of the field. The offender, I'm sure, knew exactly what he was doing and is gaining a reputation at the club for some "creative" bidding

SteveMap

Unless as Gordon commented “Maybe they were confused about the auction”, the “creative” bidding suggests possibly other wise. It maybe worth recording the details in a Psyche book.

weejonnie

Nothing wrong with "creative bidding" as long as partner isn't in on it. But if partner knows that you might be overcalling on substandard values then this should be alerted as a "potentially unexpected meaning."

Overcalling 4-card suits at the one level is recommended - but the suit tends to be something like KQT8 (minimum) not 9865 - and with extra values (and usually length in RHOs suit).

The usual suggestion is to record unusual calls a) to determine a pattern and b) to see if there is potentially a concealed partnership understanding.

Robin_BarkerTD

There are two issues with weak 4-card overcalls that are difficult to solve at club level.

1. If this is based on partnership agreement (or becomes an implicit understanding through repetition) this is a legal agreement. If there are convention cards, then the EBU regulations would require such agreements to be shown on the card. But at club level, without convention cards, you either have to require that such agreements are disclosed at the start of the round, or have a local regulation that such agreements are to be alerted - both of which are likely to interfere with the normal progress of a club game.
2. Only one of the players bids like this, and they were play this way with a number of irregular partners. There is no partnership agreement or understanding but some experiences players will know that the player bids like this. It is difficult to know how to educate other players as to this player's habits, so that they are not surprised by these antics.

The club can regulate agreements to enforce a minimum standard for overcalls but this appears to be draconian. This would only regulate agreements, so the club would also have to do something to say that such overcalls (even if not a partnership agreement/understanding) are disruptive and spoil other player's enjoyment - this would turn such tactics into a disciplinary offence. A more subtle approach is to explain the problem to the player and see if you can get them to change their tactics.

CMOT_Dibbler

@weejonnie said:
Nothing wrong with "creative bidding" as long as partner isn't in on it.

The usual suggestion is to record unusual calls a) to determine a pattern and b) to see if there is potentially a concealed partnership understanding.

@Robin_BarkerTD said:
A more subtle approach is to explain the problem to the player and see if you can get them to change their tactics.

I have a feeling that this "type" of problem is more wide spread than many realise (yes, I don't have any evidence but bear with me).
I understand the OP and agree that it is difficult to get the point over without "clouding" the issue, so the following points are to improve thoughts for the future not change circumstances. I get the feeling that once a "name" has been allocated to the "tactic" there is a built in way to deal with it. Alas this isn't always the case.

Are we/you dealing with a problem or just a symptom of a problem? We have only seen one hand. We are told that partner didn't "field" the bid, how do we know that? Was there a poll? We are told that the concern was "that if overcalls of this nature are repeated". Later we are told that the player is "gaining a reputation at the club for some "creative" bidding". So are the directors aware of any cases?
So how many known "creative" bids have there been? What, if anything was done about them? What was the standard of the opposition? Can we go back and look at the hands to see if "fielding" had taken place? I am sure that there are many more questions to ask that would provide more facts to determine a "pattern", just as weejonnie has correctly suggested.
I do like Robin's idea or approaching the "creative" bidder but probably try to find out when and why they started to use this "tactic".
With additional information it may be that the "tactic" is used against less "experienced" players and therefore it might require a push to improve those players on how to deal with "overcalls" as responder (using bids/pass or double). It might also pay to make those player more aware of how to protect themselves and what to do when this "tactic" is used on them(calling the director). I suspect that if the "creative" bidder realises that they can't benefit from the tactic then they will probably try something else.
If they use the "tactic" against any level of player, have they ever come a cropper? If not why not?

Difficult situation as it can be very upsetting for some people as they are not equiped to cope with the situation. Who knows the "creative" bidder may just be copying someone else who benefited from the same "tactic". There is also a worry that someone else might be about to follow suit!

good luck, being a director is just like herding cats! (always the same herd but different cats)

Robin_BarkerTD

@CMOT_Dibbler said:
good luck, being a director is just like herding cats! (always the same herd but different cats)

I think the TD should just record the hand and for the club management/committee to decide how to deal with the problem if there are a number of reports on a similar theme.

gordonrainsford

An aside about herding cats. Directing the Seniors Pairs at the European Championships in Herning this year, I commented that trying to get all the pairs to move to the correct tables at the correct time was like herding cats. It turned out that this expression, or any equivalent, does not exist in any of the many other languages spoken by my TD colleagues, though they agreed it described the situation well. Doesn anyone know of another language with an equivalent expression?

Robin_BarkerTD

@gordonrainsford said:
... like herding cats. It turned out that this expression, or any equivalent, does not exist in any of the many other languages spoken by my TD colleagues, ... . Does anyone know of another language with an equivalent expression?

Google suggest a Dutch phrase which translate as "like a wheelbarrow full of frogs"

UsuallyDummy

We remember when the "creative" bidder got a top for their outlandish bid, stopping us finding the normal 3NT (oh the injustice), but have weaker memories of the other times when they gave us a top after getting raised to 4S and going three down (well it was just foolish). Bidding badly should result in more bad scores than good, but the cards will sometimes reward bad bidding.

If the dodgy overcall had prevented N-S from being in the normal 3NT-1 then they probably wouldn't have called the TD.

Recording the hand is a reasonable solution because it draws attention to the wild bidding, however it can take two or three minutes which is awkward for a playing TD in a room of players impatient to move for the next round. Could do it at the end of the night (echoes of detention) or agree the bidding the next day via email (the hand records are usually online). The original case was online so the information is already available and the player needs to be informed.

@Robin_BarkerTD said:
The club would say that such overcalls (even if not a partnership agreement/understanding) are disruptive and spoil other player's enjoyment - this would turn such tactics into a disciplinary offence. A more subtle approach is to explain the problem to the player and see if you can get them to change their tactics.

How about getting them to wear a "Wild Bidder" hat!