My point exactly, the elements are certainly there. It is not a conventional "flattop" but incorporates elements of that style. Most of the foliage is in the top third of the tree. It's "flat top" starts lower down than most "conventional" flat tops, forking into twin trunks in the upper third of its height. The elements are there, just a bit blurred.
Jeez, look this isn't rocket science. Take my word for it, the question of "are BC always flat top or more conical pine shapes" comes up a lot with people just starting out with the species. There is a tendency to think "either or" when it comes to a flat top design or a more "traditional" triangular silhouette. This shows that the line between those two styles isn't bright in nature. There's a blend.
Fair enough. I'd actually like to see more examples too . . .
It is not a twin trunk, or at least not really. The split is just over a third of the way up the main trunk, far too high for a classical twin trunk. Attempting to cubbyhole style can be extremely frustrating. Tree in nature rarely provide clearcut examples of those nine styles that show up in books. Even the Japanese bonsaists have long been amused at those strict defined "styles" in western books.
