No independent sims were authorized and I was not allowed to see the exact description. I guessed how it worked from the ads and Henry verified that my guess was correct at a party. I also heard details from several other sources. (Nothing is "secret" in the BJ world.) My sims showed that the similar OPP has about half the SCORE of KO-Rookie (no indexes.) It would be better if I had access to the exact details for SC as it may SCORE a bit higher due to inclusion of a CBS. I think KO is easier - but that is just my opinion. Exactly how well it performs depends on number of players, which method of counting players is used, the spread, the exact CBS variations and which level of "aggression" used in SC. Their ad says it has anywhere from 70% to 95% of the edge of "professional level" strategies. KO Rookie is not "professional level." My estimate is closer to 35%. It is also hardly "revolutionary." It is based on the same principle as Jake Smallwood's QWIK Count developed 18 years ago. Also, it is virtually identical to Kim Lee's Drunk Count developed on the spot when asked to come up with a simple count. Cacarulo and I came up with a strategy based on the same principle. But in order to get a decent SCORE, we had to add so many twists it was more complex than HiLo
All of these strategies (and OPP) are based on the well-known fact that there are about 2.7 cards in an average BJ hand. This has been mentioned dozens of times on the forums, is in the 1983 version of Blackbelt in the section on Depth-Charging, I believe is in several issues of BJF (e.g. December 1989.) is in Blackjack Attack (e.g. page 46.) It is in Michael Dalton's old BJ Encyclopedia. It has been a standard stat in CVData and CVSim since the first version. It is one of the many methods of estimating deck depth in pitch games. For an interesting twist, Kevin Blackwood uses the same principle as a method of calculating depth while simultaneously determining if the dealer is preferrential shuffling.
I understand the need for hype in advertising. But I thought the exaggerated claims were unfortunate and the risk level very high, even if the players didn't have to spend $700-$800 to learn the strategy. I also don't like the claim that you can learn how to beat the casinos in two hours (or on the way to the casino in the car as claimed in one OPP post.) That's simply irresponsible. Beating a casino takes hard work and I have a big problem with system sellers that claim casinos are easy pickings.
There is one other, relatively minor, aspect I'll mention only because it is interesting. SC uses a CBS (Counter's Basic Strategy.) How many of these people will actually continue to use the strategy? The majority of people that try counting eventually revert to non-counting. My guess is that a far higher percentage of SC players will revert due to the low investment in time, their inability or lack of will to learn KO, and the very weak power and high risk of SC. But they will have learned a CBS. If they revert to the CBS, they will be playing a BS that is not only incorrect, but higher variance than Basic Strategy.
