[swift70]

In parts of India, I have seen a lot of people playing a system called as KD Joshi Count system. Does anyone here know this system? If so, can you post the basics of this system? I frequently play against people who bid this system - so it would be useful to have an idea of the system.

Basically the opening bid & response here is always artificial showing points - that's all I know about this.

[Zelandakh]

That sounds similar to the Orient Bidding System if memory serves so you might find it helpful to Google that and see if it seems familiar.

[zasanya]

"K.D.Joshi system was very popular in and around Mumbai (Bombay) about 40 years ago. Till 1990 there were quite a few players playing K.D.Joshi systeam in Thane-Dombivali belt."
Thane Dombivali are townships adjacent to Mumbai and boast of some of the best bridge players in India.The percentage of bridge players to total population of dombivali must be one of the highest for any township in world.
"K.D. was 90+ when he passed away. He was always very very enthusiastic about bridge. He even wrote a book on the system that was published in 1958."
Dr Prakash Paranjape (panja on bbo) has a copy of this book.You may refer to Dr Paranjape's blog from which i have quoted .
http://www.demicoma....9&theme=Printer
It is a highly artificial system 1♣=12-14 1♦=15-17 1♥=18-20 1♠=21
The responder bids the next suit to show less than Gf values and bids something else to show GF values .Then the auction proceeds naturally.e g 1♣-1♦- is less than GF .all others are GF with 5 card suits .NT trump response is GF without 4 carder.
Nowadays all the regular tournament players, reared on precision and standard presume that anyone playing K D Joshi is a weak player and 75+ and look for easy pickings.The old timers often surprise them.

[panja]

KD Joshi system was one of the 'Modular' approach systems as I would term it. At different places, similar other systems were played/written about as Tim Burke gave me to understand. You show your strength in High Card Points first time, and suits and support on subsequent rounds. It is the simplest system one could think of and I would recommend every bridge player to learn it as a first system. It is unfortunate that it is classified as an artificial system these days but that is the way it is. I had a shock of my life when I was told that it was 'illegal' in England (EBU official correspondence). An elderly couple has been harassed for last two years simply because they play this system or a certain tweak of it.

Ever since I came to know of the story, I have been feeling sick about Bridge laws and the current system policies.

[dake50]

It is a highly artificial system 1♣=12-14 1♦=15-17 1♥=18-20 1♠=21
The responder bids the next suit to show less than Gf values and bids something else to show GF values .Then the auction proceeds naturally.e g 1♣-1♦- is less than GF .all others are GF with 5 card suits .NT trump response is GF without 4 carder.
** Feels like the 1♣ needs another point:12-15 so 1D:16-18, and 1H:19-20, 1S:21+
** A 4 point range at the lowest end, 3 at 1D next lowest, 2 at 1H, unlimited 1S.
** And the no-game artificial next step is wasted as responder is captaining all auctions - he knows game on/partial.

[fromageGB]

 panja, on 2011-July-01, 12:11, said:

It is the simplest system one could think of and I would recommend every bridge player to learn it as a first system. It is unfortunate that it is classified as an artificial system these days but that is the way it is. I had a shock of my life when I was told that it was 'illegal' in England (EBU official correspondence)...

Ever since I came to know of the story, I have been feeling sick about Bridge laws and the current system policies.

You have my sympathy. The EBU may think it is making the game more open to beginners, but it is completely stifling the development of the game. IMO EBU regulations are leading to loss of interest and falling numbers.

[PrecisionL]

In the 60s, the Lea System was a similar system.

The DEMICOMA system: DEstructive MInors and COnstructive MAjors. I don't have my notes with me, but the PEAS system seems to be the precursor to DEMICOMA.

However, consider Garozzo:

"Benito Garazzo is arguably the best Bridge theoretician the world has ever known. He writes in one of his books that describing suits is more important than any other aspect of Bridge bidding . Suits are more important than HCP’s , singletons, controls or any other aspect of Bridge bidding."

Reference: http://www.pitbulls....-%20Garozzo.htm


From the DEMICOMA Site: "When was DEMICOMA developed?"

"The development of DEMICOMA began as PEAS (Dr. Deepak Khemani coined this term. PEAS stands for Paranjape Early Asking System), an aggressive slam bidding methodology, in mid-1981. A sort of backward integration led to DEMICOMA in its early form and about 80-page notes were prepared and cyclostyled for the benefit of IIT boys in 1986. There was no further printed publication after that."

DEMICOMA is a strong club and diamond major opening system:

http://web.archive.o...//demicoma.com/

[mgoetze]

 panja, on 2011-July-01, 12:11, said:

It is the simplest system one could think of and I would recommend every bridge player to learn it as a first system.

LOL no way.

[panja]

 mgoetze, on 2011-July-02, 20:16, said:

LOL no way.

Mgoetze, go ahead and try to characterise 'simple' using your background in maths. Write down a few points and then compare a few systems and then come back and write a reply to this. Let us see how it goes.

[chasetb]

I'll classify it as 'not simple'. It doesn't make sense to easily get too high on potential misfits, allow opponents to easily jump in the auction after a 1♣ or 1♦ opening, and not only jump in, but I would think letting them win many part-scores. Also, when you and partner are close to game, how can you differentiate between stopping short and forcing?

Romex is an improvement on this system, and Precision and Goren 4-card Majors are simpler than this (not to mention Precision being MUCH better than this). I also think that if you tried to teach this to the majority of people who learn to play in the US, they would be confused because of the artificiality of the system. So while it would be easier on memory, I don't think it would be easier to learn.

[mgoetze]

 panja, on 2011-July-05, 11:52, said:

Mgoetze, go ahead and try to characterise 'simple' using your background in maths. Write down a few points and then compare a few systems and then come back and write a reply to this. Let us see how it goes.

How simple it is isn't really to the point, what matters is that it will give beginners very wrong ideas about bidding. Bidding theory has advanced to a point where modern players are convinced that showing shape is much more important than showing strength. Beginners need to learn that the first priority is finding your fit.

Here's a very simple system which I would approve of for beginners:

1♣ 4+ clubs, 12-17
1♦ 4+ diamonds, 12-17
1♥ 4+ hearts, 12-17
1♠ 4+ spades, 12-17
1NT 18+ any

[wickedbid1]

 mgoetze, on 2011-July-05, 16:39, said:

How simple it is isn't really to the point, what matters is that it will give beginners very wrong ideas about bidding. Bidding theory has advanced to a point where modern players are convinced that showing shape is much more important than showing strength. Beginners need to learn that the first priority is finding your fit.

Here's a very simple system which I would approve of for beginners:

1♣ 4+ clubs, 12-17
1♦ 4+ diamonds, 12-17
1♥ 4+ hearts, 12-17
1♠ 4+ spades, 12-17
1NT 18+ any

It's not the first round of bidding that boggles beginners, it's subsequent rounds. I'm a strong advocate of five card majors right off the bat for this reason. Responder can start looking for four-four major fits, while opener has the responsibility for most of the five-three fits.

The system u suggest, with a short club instead of 4+ club, would do nicely -- no beginner has trouble finding a bid over 1 club... This is basically the Vienna Club, which i played for a while. It is surprisingly effective.

[Lurpoa]

 mgoetze, on 2011-July-02, 20:16, said:

LOL no way.

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥


please no LOL.
We are not interested in your LOL.

But tell us why you LOL. Thank you.

[Free]

 Lurpoa, on 2011-July-12, 00:28, said:

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥


please no LOL.
We are not interested in your LOL.

But tell us why you LOL. Thank you.

LOL

[mgoetze]

 Lurpoa, on 2011-July-12, 00:28, said:

We are not interested in your LOL.

"We" being you and BWS2001Expert?

Quote

But tell us why you LOL. Thank you.

Oh, so you are interested, after all. But not interested enough to read the rest of the thread...

[cloa513]

For High Card Point Fanatics, KD Joshi or something similar is a suitable system- doesn't make a good system but if you aren't sophisficated about hand evaluation and matching then its as good as any other. There are quite a few bridge players for which having 25 HCP means you must be in game or double opponents.

[Vampyr]

I'll bet that many of us, at some point in our youth, toyed, however briefly, with the idea of inventing this system. That is why I am very gratified to discover that it really exists.

So it has all the disadvantages of a strong club without the compensating limited natural openings? Well, you can't have everything. This system may well make up in entertainment value what it lacks in playability.

[Lurpoa]

 mgoetze, on 2011-July-12, 04:36, said:

"We" being you and BWS2001Expert?



Oh, so you are interested, after all. But not interested enough to read the rest of the thread...

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥

No, no LOL.
We simply do not think you have answered why you LOL the others.....

We would be most happy to hear why.

And please, no oracles ....


Really we would be most happy to hear from you.....

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥

[hrothgar]

 Lurpoa, on 2011-July-12, 11:34, said:

No, no LOL.
We simply do not think you have answered why you LOL the others.....

There is a wonderful quote in the movie Rounders: "Listen, here's the thing. If you can't spot the sucker in the first half hour at the table, then you ARE the sucker."
In a similar vein, if you can't understand what a LOL refers to, you really might want to rethink active participation in a given forum.

I think that it's patently obvious what mgoetze's LOL refers to...
However, maybe thats just me projecting

Quote

Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

Abraham Lincoln

[Free]

Please Lurpoa, stop using "we" when you mean "I".