[blml] SF NABC #10

[Guthrie]

[Richard Willey]
I agree with your basic point about the accurate use of vocabulary.
However, I think that this is an example where you don't understand
what the expression canape means.  SAYC type 1C and 1D openings are
not in any way, shape, or form canape openings.

The canape bidding style primarily applies to two suited hands.  On
occasion, some players will use a canape style with single suited
patterns.  For example, they might systemically overcall 1S with a 3
card major and a six card minor.  Playing SAYC, there are a number of
situations in which a player might chose to open a three card minor
ahead of a four card major.  However, this is always in the context of
a balanced hand pattern.  Opener will hold a 4-3-3-3 or 4-4-3-2 shape.
He does not intend to pattern out after a 1NT advance.

In a similar vein, if we look at case 7, North alerted South's 1H
opening because the pair was playing a canape opening style.  Here,
South is sitting on a balanced hand pattern. (4=4=3=2 shape)  Its
quite standard to open 1H with that shape, intending to raise a 1S
response to 2S, pass a 1NT advance or 2H advance, and rebid 2N over
2m.

The one (potential) application of canape in a SAYC type style is
pattern like 3=1=4=5 / 1=3=4=5 where some players might prefer to open
1D and rebid 2C.

[Nige1]
Richard Willey and I agree to differ whether SAYC 1C and 1D bids are 
potential "Canapé". But I'm happy to concede that Richard may be right 
about SF NABC case #7.

Under my interpretation (an ostensibly "natural" bid of shorter suit 
before a possible longer), there are other common potential "Canapé" 
bids in most natural systems e.g.
[A] 1H/1S reply to 1C/D with say S:xx H:AKxx D:x C:xxxxxx
[B] 2C reply to 1S with say S:xxx H:AKxx D:xxx C:AKx