[juljak]

MP pairs all non-vul. I would appreciate to get comments on what the 2C and 2NT bids mean in the following sequence without prior agreements playing a standard 5 card major, strong NT system?

(P)-1C-(1D)-2C-(P)-2NT...

Thanks in advance!
Juljak

[HardVector]

2c: Club support (4+ cards), 6-9 points (may be bad 10). No 4 card major (would make a negative double). May have a diamond stopper, but with really good diamonds should prefer to bid 1n.

2n: Strong hand, usually balanced 18-19. Stoppers in diamonds (note the plural, at least 1 1/2 stoppers). Should not be a "gambling" type hand. With that, just bid 3n. Does not necessarily promise stoppers in the other 2 suits, so one of the majors may be wide open, not both.

[mikeh]

It is invitational to 3N. What it shows depends on what 2C shows.

Assuming a relatively standard method, 2C is simply a raise. How many clubs it shows depends on how many clubs 1C promised, but most players, using a 5 card major system, would promise 3+. 2C will usually then deliver 5 clubs, but responder may have some 3=3=3=4 sort of hand and feel that 2C is the best option with no diamond stop.

So 2C ostensibly about 6-9, no major, as HV states. 2N says: how good is your hand within those constraints?

If responder has 8-9 or a very good 7 with 5+ clubs, he is expected to bid 3N.

With most weaker hands he is expected to pass, especially at mps where one needs to make 10 tricks in clubs to outscore 8 in 2N. However, with a very weak hand and shape, responder can bail out to 3C (whether that is plausible depends in part on what an immediate 3C over 1D would have meant).

While 2N doesn't guarantee major stoppers, opener should not often have a short, weak major, since then the opps have at least 8 cards in that suit, and the 1D bidder may well lead a major rather than a diamond into opener's holding.

[juljak]

Thanks for your help and advise. I had a 9hp 3-2-3-5 hand and passed the 2NT bid. Partner made 2NT+1, but had only 14 hp and a balanced hand. We both seem to have misjudged the situation, but my mistake was worse, I think.

Thanks again
Juljak