card counting computer

B

BradRod

Well-Known Member
When using the CCC with the KO system , how does one enter the card counting system ? since there is no selection offered for KO on the menu do you chose none or reset or some other ?? and then enter the values for the specific cards ?

also every time I run the program with my game parameters and run it out to 5, 6. or 7 digits i am always ending up with a scary negative BR. Am I playing an ultimately losing game ?? or not using the program correctly ?

values, 6D, min bet $10, max bet $500, initial BR $5,000, spread 1-8, S17, Wong neg counts, 70% pen, DAS,

these parameters are very close to my actual game. I play approx 100 hours/ mo for the past 6+ months and have been having very flat or losing results in real play too. only occassionally do i get the satisfaction of knowing that i am playing an advantaged game.

I'm thinking that the rational decision may be to give the game up. I would like to be talked out of that choice.

Anything I can change to improve my game ? or am i still witing for the advantage to kick in. I think I am profficient in counting skills ---- counting, betting, playing indisces, etc..
 
T

The Mayor

Well-Known Member
The CCC does not allow for you to use non-balanced counts like KO.

Also, it uses a generic (not optimal) Basic Strategy for all game rules, and does not have an optimal bet ramp.

In short, it is a toy 8-0

--Mayor
 
B

BradRod

Well-Known Member
>>>>>>>The CCC does not allow for you to use

non-balanced counts like KO.

Also, it uses a generic (not optimal) Basic

Strategy for all game rules, and does not have an

optimal bet ramp.

In short, it is a toy 8-0

--Mayor <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

whew !! that is a bit of a relief , i guess.

But, then is there any way to computer test the parameters of my game to see if there is any way to improve it, or to demonstrate to me that there is some prediction that I might be playing what will eventually be a winning game ?? i need a little encouragement about now.

thanks,

Brad
 
A

Abraham de Moivre

Well-Known Member
values, 6D, min bet $10, max bet $500, initial BR $5,000, spread 1-8, S17, Wong neg counts, 70% pen, DAS,

I take it the min bet $10 and max bet $500 are the table limits, as you state spread 1-8. Wong neg. counts? You are using KO, so you are starting at a negative count (KO is poor at identification of advantage situations early in a shoe.) Forget this computer sim stuff, you aren't even simming what you actually are doing.

What you can do to actually see some real world results:
1)Forget KO, move to a true count system (or learn TKO, true-counted KO).
2)With a true count system, become disciplined to WONG those shoes.
3)Spread 1-12, do you want to win or break even?
4)Move beyond the I18, sharpen up your insurance taking skills.
5)Shop for pen. Better to spend some time finding the dealer, or waiting for the dealer giving 75% pen, than playing with the dealer giving 70%.
 
B

BradRod

Well-Known Member
Thanks Abraham de M

1)Forget KO, move to a true count system (or learn TKO, true-counted KO)

I have used Omega II but, in BJ for Blood , B. Carlson does not recommend it for shoe games until one has mastered the basic system in single and double deck games, which are not available to me. After gaining profficiency in the basic system the Advaced System can be effective for multi deck games that are the only ones I have to choose from without having to travel farther. Can you suggest a TC system, Hi- Low ? other ? I think my only limitation at this time in choosing in a counting system would be too many side counts. I think I can handle side count of Aces and a 2 level system

2)With a true count system, become disciplined to WONG those shoes.

I take it that you mean both in and out. Since we are talking about the real world that seems difficult. I have been able to Wong out pretty easily. Wonging in seems to me begging for a lot of attention and whines and criticism from other players. ..."could you wait a hand or two ...", "...the shoe is almost over ...." ".....he messed up the cards..... " and then when you have managed to do it a couple of times I imagine you would run into the problem of runnung out of fresh tables to Wong. If you can manage to get away with it once or twice I think you have to have a real steely disposition to do it over and over and be able to put up with the noise.

It is sensible advice and I am sure it would help my game just not sure about how to put a table face on it to the other players.

3)Spread 1-12, do you want to win or break even?
4)Move beyond the I18, sharpen up your insurance taking skills.
5)Shop for pen. Better to spend some time finding the dealer, or waiting for the dealer giving 75% pen, than playing with the dealer

giving 70%.
 
R

Rob McGarvey

Well-Known Member
High Low

I suggest you start with and stick with High Low until you get a better grip on your game, and your abilities. If the Army issued a count to it's G.I.'s, that would be High Low.

Lock n Load!
 
zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
**My responses -

**My responses -

I have used Omega II but, in BJ for Blood , B. Carlson does not recommend it for shoe games until one has mastered the basic system in single and double deck games, which are not available to me.

**And those of us in the know do NOT recommend AO2 for any game!

After gaining profficiency in the basic system the Advaced System can be effective for multi deck games that are the only ones I have to choose from without having to travel farther. Can you suggest a TC system, Hi- Low ?

**If you were truly comfortable with AO2 then I would recommend switching to ZEN, a simple matter of just swapping the Ace and 9 tag-values (you could even keep the AO2 i#s IF you had many committed to memory (cross-rounded i#s developed specifically for ZEN would be a smidgen better)

**Second to that might be UBZ2 (level-2/no sidecount/noTC) or a TKO (true-counted KO)

I think my only limitation at this time in choosing in a counting system would be too many side counts. I think I can handle side count of Aces and a 2 level system

**Even IF you could handle it, Ace-neutral sidecounting is NOT an intelligent use of your cerebral-matter.

Since we are talking about the real world that seems difficult. I have been able to Wong out pretty easily. Wonging in seems to me begging for a lot of attention and whines and criticism from other players. ..."could you wait a hand or two ...", "...the shoe is almost over ...." ".....he messed up the cards..... " and then when you have managed to do it a couple of times I imagine you would run into the problem of runnung out of fresh tables to Wong. If you can manage to get away with it once or twice I think you have to have a real steely disposition to do it over and over and be able to put up with the noise.

**Think of it as BOTH wong in and out, you'll develop a rhythm to it - but you MUST get over any nagging self-consciousness that arises due to the other players (ie, DUMMIES) at the table having attention on you - in fact you should border on "wierdly oblivious" to it - try this: when they say "hey pal wait a few hands" just roll your eyes in a demented fashion and self-tak "hmmm Killian is lying to me" or some such. After a while there will be other players who will tacitly AVOID playing at your table, which is good! zg
 
B

BradRod

Well-Known Member
Re: **My responses -

ZG

I knew that if I read your posts long enough I would get around to using a Zen count. I believe that I will give it a try. I can use a break from playing about now anyway. I will take the time to practice the new system. It's "Blackbelt in Blackjack", right ?

Thanks for your perspective.

Brad
 
B

BradRod

Well-Known Member
6D, min bet $10, max bet $500, initial BR $5,000, spread 1-8, S17, Wong neg counts, 70% pen, DAS, color KO count
 
zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
R U sure...

... that true-count adjustment/estimation is your bag? If you have any doubt in this area, UBZ2 will perform on par w/ZEN w/o TC'ing. But, if you start with Blackbelt's ZEN you can decide whether to base your TC on 1/4D (as published) 1/2D (published i#s x2) or 1D (published i#s x4) - then there is one area where you can improve the i#s a bit: making the #s 'risk-averse', which can be the subject of another post. ZEN's big advantage over UBZ is that you will only need ONE 'composite' set of i#s for any #decks. zg
 
T

The Mayor

Well-Known Member
Max bet = $500 does not make sense if your spread is 1-8 and your min bet is $10. Besides, a max bet of $500 with a BR of $5000 is lunacy, surely you don't do that.

Thanks.
 
B

BradRod

Well-Known Member
Max bet = $500 does not make sense if your spread is 1-8 and your min bet is $10. Besides, a max bet of $500 with a BR of $5000 is lunacy, surely you don't do that.

You are right Mayor, I do not do that. I thought the entry was refering to the table max. my betting max is 80 -90.

Thanks,

Brad
 
B

BradRod

Well-Known Member
Re: for all intent...

...just substitute SilverFox to produce the same results as KO. zg

what is silver fox ?? also , when one is using the color KO system isnt that the same as having the TC given that the number of remainig decks is taken into account ??

thanks,

Brad
 
B

BradRod

Well-Known Member
Re: R U sure...

... that true-count adjustment/estimation is your bag?

** I am not really sure about anything at the moment. I thought that colorKO would be an effective system to use because it would be less strenuous than having to determine TC by division each time a decision needed to be made. Tables that I have seen rank its efficiency in categories of betting, playing and insurance as on par with good one and 2 level balanced systems ( I cant find that table right now = still looking) . But, if it is in fact not working out for me than I want to consider which system will work best.

But, if you start with Blackbelt's ZEN you can decide whether to base your TC on 1/4D (as published) 1/2D (published i#s x2) or 1D (published i#s x4) - then there is one area where you can improve the i#s a bit: making the #s 'risk-averse', which can be the subject of another post. ZEN's big advantage over UBZ is that you will only need ONE 'composite' set of i#s for any #decks.

** is 1/4D a 4 deck game ? 1/2D - 2 deck ?

I do not have any games near me less than 6D.

If you are saying that UBZII is as effective and a simpler system than Zen then I would opt for that given the limits of game now available to me. But then I guess my question would be is UBZII a more effective system for me to use than colorKO ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top