[blml] SF NABC #10

[richard willey]

> 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

This simply reinforces my basic point:

On the one hand, you are railing against people polluting standard vocabulary.
With the other, you are inventing your own meanings for standard
expressions (in this case, the expression canape)

Your example B is a situation where a player is temporizing with a 2C response.
Your example A might be a canape response structure, but its also
possible that the players are using MAFIA principles.  [Majors First
Always in Answering]

For what its worth, I am attaching Pierre Albarran's original
definition of canape.

"With a two suited hand of more than minimum strength, the higher
ranking suit must be bid on the first round if it has four cards and
on the second round if it has more than four cards"







-- 
I think back to the halcyon dates of my youth, when indeterminant
Hessians had something to do with the Revolutionary War, where
conjugate priors were monks who had broken their vows, and the
expression (X'X)^-1(X'Y) was greek

Those were simpler times