[diana_eva]

2/1, no special agreements. Random partnership, but partner is not a beginner.

What is, or should be, 2!c in this sequence?

---

Full hand here.

[gwnn]

2♣ is natural. 2♦ is stayman. 2M is also natural.

1NT is 18-19 (I'm sure diana_eva knows this but might be helpful for other people) and N could have longish clubs. I like S's 2♣ even on 4 in this case.

[rhm]

2♣ is natural, that is a weak takeout with at least 4 cards in clubs.
I am pretty sure most would consider 2♦ and 2♥ as transfers and rightly so.
There is little need for Stayman once partner could not negative double a 1♦ overcall.

Rainer Herrmann

[P_Marlowe]

2C is natural, 2H and 2S as well.

2D is the only force, asking for further description of openers hand, but you could argue,
that 2D natural makes also sense.

Responder was not able to bid 1H / 1S, a bid that would require only 6+HCP and a 4 card suit,
so why should he need a tool to go looking for a 44 fit?

With kind regards
Marlowe

[diana_eva]

Thanks. I was South, and didn't know whether 2!c can be natural or not... My pd wasn't happy

[mgoetze]

2♣ is natural, but I would pass instead.

[aguahombre]

mgoetze, on 2012-February-21, 09:00, said:

2♣ is natural, but I would pass instead.

Yeh, that hand might well pass. No guarantee of 8-cards in clubs, an unappealing number of lousy diamonds under the balancer, and a nice spade card.

Looks like a quite reasonable judgement to tough it out in 1NT, expecting to make or to double more diamonds by them.

[ggwhiz]

2♣ is natural allright but if this was MP's, you were doomed as soon as partner bid that instead of passing 1nt.

You can easily have 3 and pulling is a really poor percentage action given that ♦ ruffs (note the plural) can easily be the only way west wins a trick.