[blml] Amended L27C1/27C2 question

[Stefanie Rohan]

Sven Pran:


>> On Behalf Of Stefanie Rohan
>> > One example that was initially presented is the auction:
>> > 1C - 1S - 1H where the IB (1H) is replaced by a negative double.
>> > Both the IB
>> > and the replacement call essentially show four hearts and some
>> > values.
>> A double that guarantees four hearts should not, in my opinion,
>> be called a "negative double".
>
> I believe this is mainly a matter of customs.
>
> In Norway my example is typical for a hand that holds four hearts (or five
> hearts with insufficient strength to bid 2H), and the common name for that
> convention is just "negative double". The original idea was to show that 
> "I
> have lost my intended bid" e.g. 1H with 6+ HCP). The convention is 
> extended
> to cover among else the following situation:
> 1m - 1H - ?
> A double now (still termed "negative") shows four spades while a bid of 1S
> shows (at least) five spades.
>
This terminology is used here in England too. I don't think that it is 
accurate terminology. But the worst part is that in England, a double in one 
of those auctions is not alerted, whether it is for takeout or promises 4 of 
the other major. And if you needed to know what it was, you'd need to ask a 
lot of questions, because players with both agreements will likely answer 
"negative".


Stefanie Rohan
London, England