[MickyB]

(1♦)-1♠-(X)-1NT
(P)-2♣-(P)-2♦

What does this mean? If it's relevant, oppo are playing SAYC.

[david_c]

Looks natural to me.

[gwnn]

looks like a good raise of ♣ to me:)

I am not crazy about bidding 1NT with the natural diamond hands.

Qx
xxx
Axx
Axxxx

[sheepman]

Not natural, how isn't this compeletly obvious MickyB?

[Fluffy]

2♦ is the final contract.

[neilkaz]

I would play this as natural. If I have a good raise of ♣ I'll just raise ♣

[MickyB]

It certainly feels like the same sequence without a negative double in there should be natural, as responder may feel the need to keep the auction open holding long diamonds. Maybe with the double in there you can assume the diamond hands would kick off with a pass rather than 1NT?

[Apollo81]

I'd assume natural. Responder could have bid 3♣ with a maximum and club support.

[jdonn]

Cuebid for clubs. The votes for natural are enlightening, in that I would have predicted this to be unanimous as a club raise.

[Apollo81]

jdonn, on Feb 24 2009, 12:29 PM, said:

Cuebid for clubs. The votes for natural are enlightening, in that I would have predicted this to be unanimous as a club raise.

Some questions:

1. Would you ever bid 1NT here with a 2-3-6-2 hand?

2. Would you ever bid 1NT here with a 2-6-3-2 hand?

3. Do you think that a minimum with 5-card club support can pass 2♣?

[jdonn]

Apollo81, on Feb 24 2009, 11:49 AM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 24 2009, 12:29 PM, said:

Cuebid for clubs. The votes for natural are enlightening, in that I would have predicted this to be unanimous as a club raise.

Some questions:

1. Would you ever bid 1NT here with a 2-3-6-2 hand?

2. Would you ever bid 1NT here with a 2-6-3-2 hand?

3. Do you think that a minimum with 5-card club support can pass 2♣?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Yes

[paulg]

The 1NT bid has a very wide range, which does suggest that differentiating between a good raise and a courtesy raise is worthwhile.

Paul

[Walddk]

I remember the hand and agree with your partner. This is a sound club raise. The commentators predicted that you would pass, because it did indeed look natural when you looked at your cards.

2♦ = "My hand became enormous when you rebid 2♣".

Roland

[Apollo81]

jdonn, on Feb 24 2009, 01:48 PM, said:

Apollo81, on Feb 24 2009, 11:49 AM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 24 2009, 12:29 PM, said:

Cuebid for clubs. The votes for natural are enlightening, in that I would have predicted this to be unanimous as a club raise.

Some questions:

1. Would you ever bid 1NT here with a 2-3-6-2 hand?

2. Would you ever bid 1NT here with a 2-6-3-2 hand?

3. Do you think that a minimum with 5-card club support can pass 2♣?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Yes

Then, ignoring for a minute what things mean in real life, perhaps 2♦ should be natural and 2♥ should mean the really good club raise?

[jdonn]

Apollo81, on Feb 24 2009, 03:24 PM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 24 2009, 01:48 PM, said:

Apollo81, on Feb 24 2009, 11:49 AM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 24 2009, 12:29 PM, said:

Cuebid for clubs. The votes for natural are enlightening, in that I would have predicted this to be unanimous as a club raise.

Some questions:

1. Would you ever bid 1NT here with a 2-3-6-2 hand?

2. Would you ever bid 1NT here with a 2-6-3-2 hand?

3. Do you think that a minimum with 5-card club support can pass 2♣?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Yes

Then, ignoring for a minute what things mean in real life, perhaps 2♦ should be natural and 2♥ should mean the really good club raise?

Perhaps, perhaps not. Seems to me like being able to bid a 5 card major is more important than a 6 card minor. I also do not consider it a real loss having to play a 5-2 major suit fit.

I am also not particularly interested in trying to create different definitions for
(1♦) 1♠ (X) 1NT
(P) 2♣ (P) 2♦
and
(1♦) 1♥ (X) 1NT
(P) 2♣ (P) 2♦
which is in the dictionary next to misunderstanding-waiting-to-happen.

Btw, why are we ignoring what things mean in real life? The OP asked what this means. I assume real life was the realm in which he was interested in the answer.

[kfay]

jdonn, on Feb 24 2009, 03:47 PM, said:

[Long series of quotes]

I am also not particularly interested in trying to create different definitions for
(1♦) 1♠ (X) 1NT
(P) 2♣ (P) 2♦
and
(1♦) 1♥ (X) 1NT
(P) 2♣ (P) 2♦
which is in the dictionary next to misunderstanding-waiting-to-happen.

I would have thought that 2♠ in the 2nd auction was obviously impossible so 2♦ should be natural. To me that means that these two particular auctions do have different meanings.

[Walddk]

By the way, full credit to your RHO for not doubling 2♦.