[knyblad]

---

North opens out of turn with a PASS and East does not accept the bid. Director tells him to pass when it becomes his turn to bid. South realize that E-W may have game in there cards and choses to open with 1NT as a psycke. It is AI to South that North must PASS, and UI that his bid out of turn was PASS. May South bid such a Psycke?

[pran]

knyblad, on Sep 1 2010, 07:28 AM, said:

---

North opens out of turn with a PASS and East does not accept the bid. Director tells him to pass when it becomes his turn to bid. South realize that E-W may have game in there cards and choses to open with 1NT as a psycke. It is AI to South that North must PASS, and UI that his bid out of turn was PASS. May South bid such a Psycke?

Yes, but I would subsequently adjust the result on the board if I find that East/West are damaged from South selecting a logical alternative that could have been suggested by the extraneous information: North does not hold opening values.

[PeterE]

He may do so, but if it works, the TD (I) will award an adjusted score afterwards.
Furthermore I will issue a PP (unless South is very inexperienced - obviously not this South) because of blatant use of UI.

As you correctly said, it is UI for South that North has no opening in hand. Only with this (U) information South concluded that EW might (will) have a game to reach.

[dburn]

More complex, perhaps, are these questions:

East opens a strong club out of turn - North is the dealer. South does not accept the opening bid, and the auction reverts to North who has a Yarborough.

May North psyche, knowing that to do so will bar West?

If so, is the knowledge that North is more likely to psyche in this position than some others AI to South?

If North does psyche and East doubles for penalty (obviously so, for West must pass), may North-South claim a foul under Law 23?

If North does not psyche (because on this occasion he does not have a Yarborough but an opening bid) and East doubles for penalty when South has a Yarborough, may North-South claim a foul under Law 23?

If North bids (whether or not he psyches), is there any legal call East may make that will not bar West?

[PeterE]

dburn, on Sep 1 2010, 03:24 AM, said:

May North psyche, knowing that to do so will bar West?

Yes, Law 40 C1.
North is a non-offender and not under any UI constraints.

Quote

If so, is the knowledge that North is more likely to psyche in this position than some others AI to South?

Probably No, Law 40 C1 ([...] provided that his partner has no more reason to be aware of the deviation than have the opponents [...])

Quote

If North does psyche and East doubles for penalty (obviously so, for West must pass), may North-South claim a foul under Law 23?

No, East could not have forseen that situation

Quote

If North does not psyche (because on this occasion he does not have a Yarborough but an opening bid) and East doubles for penalty when South has a Yarborough, may North-South claim a foul under Law 23?

No, same as above

Quote

If North bids (whether or not he psyches), is there any legal call East may make that will not bar West?

No, because a strong 1♣ has no denomination that can be repeated (Law 29 C).

[RMB1]

I agree with PeterE, except:

PeterE, on Sep 1 2010, 09:53 AM, said:

Quote

If so, is the knowledge that North is more likely to psyche in this position than some others AI to South?

Probably No, Law 40 C1 ;) ([...] provided that his partner has no more reason to be aware of the deviation than have the opponents [...])

I would answer "Yes, this is AI", quoting the same law as PeterE: the knowledge is based on general bridge knowledge not a (concealed) partnership understanding.

Perhaps PeterE meant "probably not UI"?

[PeterE]

Robin, I had the same "Probably No, see above" first written and then reread the question

Quote

... North is more likely to psyche in this position than some others  ...

Now we have a point of knowledge about North' habits (that are unknown to E/W) and now N/S might have a advantage using this knowledge.
But of course in principle South may anticipate a psych by North.

[pran]

dburn, on Sep 1 2010, 09:24 AM, said:

More complex, perhaps, are these questions:

East opens a strong club out of turn - North is the dealer. South does not accept the opening bid, and the auction reverts to North who has a Yarborough.

May North psyche, knowing that to do so will bar West?

If so, is the knowledge that North is more likely to psyche in this position than some others AI to South?

If North does psyche and East doubles for penalty (obviously so, for West must pass), may North-South claim a foul under Law 23?

If North does not psyche (because on this occasion he does not have a Yarborough but an opening bid) and East doubles for penalty when South has a Yarborough, may North-South claim a foul under Law 23?

If North bids (whether or not he psyches), is there any legal call East may make that will not bar West?

North may make any (legal) call he wants, he is under no UI restrictions.

South may make any (legal) call he wants, he is under no UI restrictions regardless of which (legal) call North has made. The knowledge that North in this situation is likely to "bend" agreements and maybe even psyche is general bridge knowledge rather than special partnership understanding.

Edited: For your last question: NO - see Law 29C

[RMB1]

Perhaps we have wandered too far off topic.

dburn, on Sep 1 2010, 09:24 AM, said:

If so, is the knowledge that North is more likely to psyche in this position than some others AI to South?

I understood "is the knowledge that North is more likely to psyche in this [particular] position than some other [positions]s"
not "is the knowledge that [this] North is more likely to psyche in this position than some other [North]s".

It is AI that this is a special position, that any player (as North) is more likely to psyche than if East had not opened out of turn.

It is illegal for South to have a partnership agreement with this North to be more likely to psyche (as dealer).

[mjj29]

Another interesting question (and now I am wandering really off topic) I was wondering: if the BOOT was a multi 2D, would bidding one of the majors be considered to repeat the denomination shown?

[RMB1]

mjj29, on Sep 1 2010, 12:39 PM, said:

Another interesting question (and now I am wandering really off topic) I was wondering: if the BOOT was a multi 2D, would bidding one of the majors be considered to repeat the denomination shown?

No. There is no (single) denomination shown by 2♦ so it can't be repeated.

Wandering further off topic. There is a famous incident, where a player opened a very weak multi out of turn (silencing partner) and then psyched the major he did not have. The final decision was that the player "could have known" at the time he opened out of turn, that silencing partner, allowing a "safe" psyche in the wrong major, could be to his advantage.

[PeterE]

RMB1, on Sep 1 2010, 06:19 AM, said:

It is AI that this is a special position, that any player (as North) is more likely to psyche than if East had not opened out of turn.

It is illegal for South to have a partnership agreement with this North to be more likely to psyche (as dealer).

This is exactly my (and the laws') position