Psyche bid or sacrifice bid?
Once again my club's gambling member made a bid light in HCPs. It was an interference lead direction overbid this time. I became aware that the director was asked to enter it in the "psyche book" by the opposition. I suggested the director needed to confirm it was a gross misrepresentation of his hand rather than rely on the interpretation from the opposition player....
Psyche bids are defined in the rule book. Pre-empt bid HCP counts can be anticipated by all. What I cannot find defined in the law book or the NZ Bridge Manual is sacrifice bidding. My gambling club member would argue he does not psyche, but makes sacrifice bids. I do not find his bids gross misrepresentations but it is difficult to clarify the difference between a psyche bid, a sacrifice bid and a gambling bid to the opposition.
Is there documentation for the director to use?
Latest Posts on this Thread
- NICK WHITTEN25 Dec 2025 at 08:47PM
Many years ago a contributor to another forum suggested the following definition of a psyche
"If, by changing one card (or your choice) to another, the bid made becomes a sound one then it is not a psyche"
I don't know if that has any official status
but IMO it should
and it is consistent with the use of the word "gross"For example suppose 1 spade was opened with 5431 shape and the only points are KQJ of spades
Then replacing the club with the space Ace would create a sound opening then it is not a psyche it is a shaded bidI don't think whether it was intended as a sacrifice or not comes into the equation
- SEAN LYNCH31 Dec 2025 at 07:48PM
NZ Bridge Manual:
Appendix 15. Deceptive Calls and Play
35.1 A "psyche" is a deliberate gross misrepresentation of your high card strength and/or the length of one of your suits (Laws of Duplicate Bridge 2017, page 21). Note: The key words are "deliberate and "gross". To make a wrong bid accidentally is not a "psyche" – it is not deliberate. To shade an opening bid by a couple of points is not a "psyche" – it is not gross.
So after a natural 1D opening in 2nd position and if by partnership agreement a 1 level overcall of 1H has 5+H and 6+HCP then bidding 1H with the following would be psyches:
1. Insufficient HCP
S xx
H xxxxxx
D xxx
C xx
2. Misrepresented shape
S Axxxxx
H -
D xxx
C Qxxx
However, for hand 1 if one of the H were instead replaced by the AH then this would be shading by a couple of HCP amd would not be a gross misrepresentation and would not be a psyche.
- MALCOLM MACLEOD31 Dec 2025 at 08:29PM
Yes Sean, I agree. The question is what do I, as director, tell the agrieved opposition? What do I quote when saying it is not a psyche bid because it was not a deliberate gross misrepresentation of the hand, just an acceptable (shaded / sacrifice / gambling / mistaken) bid as defined ___?
Interestingly, it is the bidders responsibility to report their pysche bid to the director, lending to the question as to whether it was deliberate. Perhaps I have to ask the bidder if the intent of the bid was to psyche, and if the intent was not there, then it is simply an undefined bid that is not a pysche...
- NICK WHITTEN04 Jan 2026 at 07:27PM
It is human nature for anyone to feel aggrieved if an opponent’s “off the piste” action (in broad terms; including a number of things, of which one is a psyche) works well for them (the opponents).
And many won’t be any less aggrieved if informed by the director what the opponents did was perfectly legal.
I think the best thing for the director to say is “provided the methods are fully disclosed it is not an infraction to violate one’s own side’s methods unless it happens often enough for partner to be more aware of the possibility than the opponents”.
And maybe add (provided it is true
) “partner’s action here is consistent with him/her being completely unaware of the situation”
You need to be logged in to reply to threads.
Click here to log in.
Click here to log in.
