Negative Double Poll

[Fluffy]

It shows a 8+ HCP hand with no better bid avaible. Nothing else. I was never dealt a 4243 without stopper, maybe when I do I'll change my mind :P

[fyrish]

For me it promises 4♥ and tends to have tolerance for ♦ - otherwise support for ♣

[pigpenz]

I play as 4 hearts 100% and tends to imply diamonds

[Kalvan14]

4 hearts are at least 95% guaranteed. I find very difficult to imagine a hand which is not worth a cue-bid, or a raise in clubs, and still necessitates of a negative double without 4/+ hearts.

[Vilgan]

What would be the benefit of X without 4 hearts? I guess if you have AKQ of hearts, your partner might forgive you. I don't see why it would ever promise diamonds, as you could easily have 3 4 2 4 and be interested in a major suit fit first, with the ability to come back to clubs later if they don't have hearts.

 

Eric

[pclayton]

I thought it was: guarantees 4 hearts; says nothing about diamonds. However, a particular popular book for the masses states that it implies both suits. My reasoning is as follows:

 

What are you going to do with:

 

S-7542

H-AK94

D-62

C-J73

 

over 1C by pard and 1S overcalled? If you choose a negative double suggesting diamonds as well as hearts, partner will do the wrong thing over 3S (preemptive) on your left (or even 2S) when he holds some diamonds (not at all unlikely given your shortness.) While I'd like to think that everybody would make a negative double with the above hand, those that argue that pass is correct (because you don't have diamonds) will give up in many part score battles they should be winning.

Paul, nice to see you posting on here again.

 

What book are you referring to? The only method that seems remotely like what this book is suggesting is Sputnik Doubles that were popular in the 60's. My understanding was that a Sputnik just said I want to make a call, but there isn't one available. No particular rules (except maybe strength) were associated.

 

As Negative Doubles evolved, Sputniks were discarded.