Sitting south I held:
Scoring: MP
Since I agreed to play solid openers with him, I passed and pard opened 1♣ and he is known to be a very solid opener normally,
especially when opening a minor (1 major in 3rd hand could be light).
I respond 1♦ and he rebids 1 NT.
I rebid 3 NT.
Pard held:
Scoring: MP
and he went down 1 because ♦ broke 4-1.
He was a bit upset and called my 3 nt bid a 'rookie mistake'.
I should have bid 2 nt, which would put him in position to judge
whether or not he should bid 3 nt, having precise information on my
hand (a good 10 to a bad 12 count).
If I had bid 2 nt, he no doubt would have passed.
I think however that there is one positive feature about my hand that he can
not know and therefore not take into account: the 5-card
diamonds, where he is likely to hold 3 himself. I could easily
have had a 3-3-4-3 or 4-4 in the minors, in which case 3 nt is much
less attractive, and I might have bid 2 nt with that.
Also I think that 3 nt on our combined hands is a very reasonable contract that
was just unlucky to fail (at least half of the field was in 3 nt actually).
What do you think? Was this really a 'rookie mistake'?