[gwnn]

I agree with han, I spoke too soon. 3N is fine. I wouldn't normally bid 2N with 16 but this is a very good 19.

[mikeh]

I would bid 2♠ because I see two problems with 2N.

Missing spades is not one of them provided that one plays a reasonable method over 2N rebids (I very strongly endorse transfers, but they might be a bit advanced for B/I).

The two problems I do see are related: I think the hand is simply too strong.

2N shows 18-19, but this hand, due to the good 5 card suit and the plethora of controls ( Aces and Kings are probably undervalued in the simplistic 4321 count), is too good for that call.

The second problem is that partner may not evaluate correctly for a slam....we can find spades, for example, but he may have difficulty picturing just how powerful a hand we have for that suit, and he may not even bother to investigate diamonds, especially after finding our spades....he will assume that we are probably 4=4.

The downside to 2♠ is not insignificant. I like to use 2N as lebensohl over 2♠ so as to better define slam-interest hands....it is useful, in my view, to be able to play a raise to 3♠ or a preference to 3♦ as 'real'....and go through 2N to slow the auction down. I got slapped down for suggesting that in a thread many months ago, with posters pointing out that 2♠ had a minimum limit higher than the minimum for a reverse, over which it is common to play lebensohl or ingberman, but I still think this is a good treatment.

If you agree with me, then there is real risk that partner will bid 2N and we have to raise to 3N and the club King is exposed.

If, otoh, you would only permit 2N on hands with a club card, then 2♠ has far less downside.

Either way, I see 2♠ as the best call at our second bid.

[georgeac]

i bid 2nt worried about wrongsiding it. this is probably a poor choice by reading the responses.