First, “whose fault” is not a helpful partnership instrument, besides probably (some superb gamers will disagree) acknowledging one’s personal unprompted.
Second, agreements about doubles are completely different in numerous areas (and completely different experiences); agreements about how aggressive one balances are completely different in other places. So, like many “ought to I” questions, there is not any common proper reply. I will reply with “what I would count on from a random Flight A participant in North America” – however do learn to the tip!
Having stated that, not attending to a 27 level sport simply because they opened (and rebid) is a partnership downside, and it’s value wanting on the causes of that situation.
Pavlicek teaches (over bids – related arguments would apply to doubles, I’d say) that “it is best to use the identical responding methodology[], besides responder ought to add two factors to all the purpose ranges.” Others say 3.
Does that take accomplice’s 12 out of a 2♦ cuebid? Probably – 11 is “normal” minimal after a direct double, + 2 factors is 13. Does the two♣ rebid, which implies accomplice might move and also you’d get one other name, imply that the free bid of 2NT is stronger than with a move? Or weaker (as a result of she will now not bid 1NT)? Or the identical?
Attention-grabbing questions. You are most likely not going to get a lot “the e-book says” or “the skilled says” about this – I can not bear in mind the final public sale this was an choice.
Keep in mind, NT bids are not what a takeout doubler needs to listen to; because of this, they’re held to the next minimal even on the 1 stage. “Commonplace”, once more, for 1♦-X-p-1NT is “respectable 8-10”, and 2NT increased than that.
Taking a look at your hand, you do not have a diamond stopper, however Qx goes to be a pleasant fill-in for accomplice’s proven cease so it is not “waste paper”. It won’t rely its full 2 factors, nevertheless it’s not zero. And you’ve got a membership cease to assist hers, which could not be stable – you “bid” the swimsuit in spite of everything. So, you’ve gotten a “unhealthy balanced 15” within the context of this public sale.
What does accomplice have? Even when 2NT is not fairly as robust as it will be with out the 2-level overcall, the minimal “1NT” fingers have an ideal, protected name – move. If you happen to’re on the 10-ish you might be, advantageous. If you happen to’re on a “actual” (would have finished it direct) double, you may double once more and she will bid realizing accomplice has ceiling.
If you happen to had opened this 1NT, the opponents overcalled diamonds, and accomplice confirmed a minimum of 9 or 10, however probably a little bit extra, with diamonds stopped, would you wish to be in sport? I’d say sure.
I’d most likely invite if she had bid a swimsuit, although. Once more, she will move the minimums, however 2♥ “present match with match” might simply be 6 or so. And now your ♦Q most likely is “waste paper”.
I believe the “fault” of this hand comes all the way down to differing partnership understandings about “steal a king from accomplice” when balancing. You anticipated accomplice to bid 2NT over 2♣ with successfully “minor stops and a card”, and you’ll’t see 9 methods. She anticipated you to move 2NT with the shapely 10, and go to sport with something however the minimal of “direct doubles”. This, not “what ought to we now have finished”, is what must be mentioned, in order that subsequent time, you each are utilizing the identical assumptions.
