My preference is to make a single raise 2♠ rather than go through 1NT. This is because I fully agree with the following points made against Constructive Major Raises by Max Hardy in his widely used book "2/1 Game Force", page 17: "...when a responder has a raise that is not of the "constructive" nature that the bidding side creates unnecessary problems for itself by having agreed to use this method. Since responder with a minimum raise of a good five to about seven points is not permitted to make that raise at once, he is required to instead make a Forcing Notrump response. Here, where the best idea would be to keep the opponents out of the auction by making a preemptive single raise, users of the Constructive Major Raises give their opponents free rein to enter the auction and make use of the two level. Where a barricade could and should be erected, no impediment is put into the path of the opponents. If the opponents fail to take advantage of their unwarrented opportunity to enter the auction after the forcing notrump response, users of Constructive Major Raises have yet another obstacle to overcome. After opener has made his rebid, responder now takes a preference to opener's major suit. Since the auction would also occur when the responder had a doubleton in opener's major suit, opener is at loss to know whether his side does or does not have a fit in the major suit." ... and Hardy's conclusion on page 18: "If you feel that you must use Constructive Major Raises, be aware of the pitfalls that you create in order to have the advantage of knowing that responder's single raise will always be gilt-edged. The test of a a convention's usefulness is to measure what is gained against what is given up. Here, our opinion is that the gain is far outweighed by the loss when this convention is adopted."
