My link
Matchpoints, ACBL robot individual
Note that South's 3♣ rebid still shows 17+, a requirement not standard to any version of 2/1 with which I am familiar. Note also that South has every bit of that, without considering shortness, yet North bids to an extremely low-percentage contract.
The problem here is that North continues to over-value shortness is partner's suits. One constantly hears about "simming." Is part of that not considering what it will do with its ♠Jxxxx? Would not 4♥ over 3♣ have sufficed?
As a side note, those Souths who bid their hands in standard fashion, starting with 2♦, got a ♣ lead and ended up down 2 (or 3) trying to make the contract (♠AQ onside tight and friendly ♥s I think will see you home). Those who bid a non-standard 2♣ first got the lead of ♠Q and were down at trick 2, but West continued with a very friendly ♠10 and they ended up down only 1 for a great score. I'd be interested to know why bidding the same minor suits in reverse order triggers such a vastly different lead.
Page 1 of 1