First, “whose fault” is not a helpful partnership device, 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 somewhere else. So, like many “ought to I” questions, there is no common proper reply. I am going to reply with “what I would count on from a random Flight A participant in North America” – however do learn to the top!
Having mentioned that, not attending to a 27 level sport simply because they opened (and rebid) is a partnership downside, and it’s price wanting on the causes of that situation.
Pavlicek teaches (over bids – comparable arguments would apply to doubles, I might say) that “you need to use the identical responding technique[], besides responder ought to add two factors to all the purpose ranges.” Others say 3.
Does that take companion’s 12 out of a 2♦ cuebid? Probably – 11 is “customary” minimal after a direct double, + 2 factors is 13. Does the two♣ rebid, which implies companion may 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 be able to not bid 1NT)? Or the identical?
Fascinating questions. You are in all probability not going to get a lot “the guide says” or “the knowledgeable says” about this – I am unable to keep in mind the final public sale this was an possibility.
Keep in mind, NT bids are not what a takeout doubler desires to listen to; because of this, they’re held to the next minimal even on the 1 degree. “Normal”, once more, for 1♦-X-p-1NT is “respectable 8-10”, and 2NT increased than that.
your hand, you do not have a diamond stopper, however Qx goes to be a pleasant fill-in for companion’s proven cease so it isn’t “waste paper”. It may not depend its full 2 factors, but it surely’s not zero. And you’ve got a membership cease to assist hers, which could not be stable – you “bid” the go well with in spite of everything. So, you might have a “dangerous balanced 15” within the context of this public sale.
What does companion have? Even when 2NT is not fairly as sturdy as it might be with out the 2-level overcall, the minimal “1NT” palms have an ideal, secure name – move. When you’re on the 10-ish you may be, effective. When you’re on a “actual” (would have executed it direct) double, you may double once more and she will be able to bid realizing companion has a very good ceiling.
When you had opened this 1NT, the opponents overcalled diamonds, and companion confirmed a minimum of a very good 9 or 10, however probably a little bit extra, with diamonds stopped, would you need to be in sport? I might say sure.
I might in all probability invite if she had bid a go well with, although. Once more, she will be able to move the minimums, however 2♥ “present match with match” may simply be a very good 6 or so. And now your ♦Q in all probability is “waste paper”.
I feel the “fault” of this hand comes all the way down to differing partnership understandings about “steal a king from companion” when balancing. You anticipated companion 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 have now executed”, is what must be mentioned, in order that subsequent time, you each are utilizing the identical assumptions.
