KO's the one...

[zengrifter]

...book and system that I now recommend to ALL newbies and neophytes. I have discovered that many newbies have a problem with red7 (bifurcating the 7s).

beyond the KO-PREF, I derived from the book's appendix a set of 15 or so additional 1&2D 'composite' indices (total 35 or so #s).

why should any newbie bother with TC and anything else? zg

 

[Hinoon]

ZG

This is an interesting post. When I first found this hobby (lifestyle, habit, career, call it what you will), my impression was that the hi-lo count was the most efficient and accurate count there was. It seems to be the backbone for all "serious" or "pro" counts.

In my reading I only later discovered the "unbalanced" count. It seems like while you'd have an easier time from the start...it would be just as hard to later switch to a balanced count as it wouldbe to learn it from the get go...old habits die hard and such.

You have often been a champion for accuracy, encouraging index knowledge that some have called overkill. So I would have guessed that you would shy away from the unbalanced counts.

Do you advocate learning an unbalanced count...building proficiency and then switching once you reach a certain level? I made a commitment to hone my hi-lo skills before I started toying with other counts, and I'm intent on doing so. But I certainly would like to know your reasoning behind the preference.

I'm glad to see you posting again. Your volume and content was missed and I know that there are a lot of us who are waiting to see what you choose to share with us.

Cheers,

-HiNoon

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Re: Yes

KO is a winner, probably a better choice than High-Low if you're playing shoe. But my understanding of unbalanced counts (I've never used one) is that the playing indexes are very dependent on number of decks. Now although I play mostly shoe, I play about an equal amount of 6D and 8D.

I'd been playing East Coast shoe with High-Low for a few months with excellent results, then I found myself playing SD and DD in Reno one weekend and I was in a different world. My High-Low knowledge was barely transferable and althbough I had a profitable trip I had to fight too hard. This is the kind of situation I'd be afraid of getting into with KO. So I took up HO2+A as a system that will be very powerful in any kind of game. Well worth it.

 

[Inskipp]

In unbalanced counts, if you adjust your starting count to the number of decks, you need only memorize one set of index numbers.

 

[Rob McGarvey]

Page 93 of Ken Uston on Blackjack

Previously, you were quoting the same things that Uston did on page 93 of this book. Uston basically said the Ace side count was unnecessary, that his U+/- (Plus Minus) count was superior to his UAPC. Zen was the way to go, or you could go for the "stronger and simpler" Uston SS count. Then he goes on to say that he continued to brush up on the Revere 14 APC with 140 indices in any event. He said as you often do the Ace side count is a waste of energy. Still I see it as a "do as I say not as I do" from Ken. I agree that a simple count is good for the new players that come along, but I also feel that once you have a count down that performs better in the B and P and I areas it makes little sense to drop it for something simpler. I think you are still using Zen with plenty of indices, play longer faster, etc to get your edge. Right now I am not really interested in counting because it is not necessary online. IT only takes me an hour to brush up, and I often see trackable games when I do get out that once again don't really require a count. But when and if the day comes when I do return to counting I see no reason to stop using Hi Opt II. If I do decide to count the Aces with the 10's, I would use Zen or my Zen III.

 

[MrPill]

Still Red7 for me!

Guess I'm just a good bifurcator!

Pill

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Re: Ever try Red 7-9?

This is a fun one- play High-Low, but count the red 7's as +1 and the red 9's as -1. It's a slight improvement. Even better, count the black 7's and 9's, on the off chance somebody upstairs is counting Red 7 along with you.

 

[Felix Rue-de-Guerre]

Interesting!

I'm just thinking out loud here.

I suppose a complete level 2 system is possible using colors. Does this exist? I know red sevens counts only red sevens to effectively value sevens at .5. I guess that would technically make it a level 2 count. Does it count any other values this way or just the sevens?

cards counted as 1 or -1... count all of them.
cards counted as .5 or - .5... count the red ones.

It seems like any level 2 count could be modified to be used this way. And I imagine it would be simpler. I wonder what effect the randomness of colors throuout the shoe would ultimately have. A shoe could be rich/lean in red cards up front, I guess.

Come to think of it a level 4 system would be possible using all suits. Kind of a cool thought, I guess. I wonder what a sim of this would reveal.

-Felix

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Re: Interesting!

The uneven distribution of colors is a slight problem. I believe Red 7 is intended only for shoe. So if at the end of the shoe there are six 7's left and they all happen to be red or black (not that unlikely, will happen about 3% of the time) your BC is hurting. Much safer I think to just use an outright level 2 count.

While you're messing with colors, why not suits for a level 4 count? Count all the 9's other than clubs as -1, etc. Sounds like a fun exercise but I'm not going to be doing that on the felt any time soon!

 

[Felix Rue-de-Guerre]

Re: Interesting!

>>Sounds like a fun exercise but I'm not going to be doing that on the felt any time soon!

As I think about it, this may not be horribly difficult. One would always be adding and subtracting 1. I gave 'Halves' a go a while back and abandoned it because it was too taxing adding those fractions. I would have made too many mistakes to warrant the switch. But this I think I could do. Here one adds or subtracts 1 based on a visual cue. Once it was learned it would be simple.

Some Interesting math would be taking place though. The values where all suits are counted as -1 or +1 will be more accurate then those where only one suit is counted. So, any existing level 4 count might not translate well. It would need to be simmed, of course. I wonder if there is any software out there that would handle this kind of simulation? I doubt it. Maybe once I'm done with the other 4 million things on my to-do pile I will write something.

So do I have the makin's here for a proprietary system? I can just envision the infomercial now:
"Simple level 4 system by Felix Rue-de-guerre, Only $1400! Get yours today!" Whoo-hoo! I'm rich!

 

[Radar]

My thoughts on KO

"KO is a winner, probably a better choice than High-Low if you're playing shoe."

That depends, in my opinion. I have started AP play on 1 January this year and have only learned KO from the gitgo. I like the ease of not having to convert to a true count (I'm lazy), as converting seems to me to take you away from concentrating on the running count and indexes.

Anyway, with shoe games, I would think that Hi-Lo would be easier. With KO, you start with a -20 count for a six decker and -28 for an 8 deck game. Can you imagine how long into the shoe you have to go to get an advantage? Unless you Wong, I say, forget it. For that very reason, alone, I play only Double Deck games.

I was going to switch to Hi-Lo after I felt proficient with KO, but it seems the Pros have a high regard for the KnockOut system, so I guess I will stay with it...

btw...I AM ahead, so far, this year with my advantage play...

 

[CanKen]

Re: My thoughts on KO

I use KO, and most of my play is 8 decks. It's certainly true that with 8 decks "opportunity arises slowly"; it takes patience and wonging in certainly helps when it's possible - wonging out is nearly always possible, and necessary for 8 decks.
But I don't understand why you say that Hi-Lo would show an advantage sooner than KO. Surely any count would indicate an advantage at about the same time.
Please correct me if I'm missing something.
One good thing that happens sometimes with 8 decks is that the count may rise fast early in the shoe and then stay at an advantage level to the end, which gives a lot of bigger bet opportunities.

CK

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Re: My thoughts on KO

I agree, it will take about as long with any level 1 count to get to a good count. The only way to get there faster is to use a level 2 or 3 count.

 

[Rob McGarvey]

Re: My thoughts on KO

That too is my main problem with unbalanced count systems for newbies. There is a remedy for counting backwards from -20 to 0 by changing your numbers by 20 and starting at 0 instead of -20. dito red 7.

 

[Rob McGarvey]

Re: My thoughts on KO

"One good thing that happens sometimes with 8 decks is that the count may rise fast early in the shoe and then stay at an advantage level to the end, which gives a lot of bigger bet opportunities."

You are right. This is one advantage of multi deck games. You play into a low rich deck with a min bet out, then you HOPE the A and 10 are not behind the cut card. Without tracking you will often be playing your big bets into luke warm areas of the deck which can inversely effect your expectation as you play into a 0TC area. In the long run you will be ahead, no question, but by knowing more about what is happening today right in front of you, you can increase your long range advantage proportionally to your accuracy.

 

[CanKen]

Re: My thoughts on KO

Good advice. Since I started I've used IRC(initial running count)=0.
But I've often thought I should have used IRC=10 which would almost completely eliminate negative counts, especially if you use exit points equivalent to TC of -1 at each deck level.
But right now I don't feel like making the change and relearning index numbers.

 

[MrPill]

Counting "forward" with Negative Numbers

Of course you would have to have a different IRC depending on the number of decks you play otherwise your pivot and index numbers would all change for each change in the number of decks your are playing against.

As someone that uses the Red 7, I found it pretty easy to learn counting with negative numbers. I remember counting forward and backwards while driving, starting at say -20 going to 20. It is just a matter of practice and it should come easy to anyone. And I can brush up on this while driving the hour it takes me to get to the casino.

Another thing that helped was to instead of using the word "minus" in your count, which has two syllables, find something that has one syllable and train yourself that is means minus. I mentally us the sound "Dee". It actually helped me to count down a deck much faster (~25 sec).

Good Luck All,
Pill

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Re: Counting in your head

I use a sidecount so I have two axes to keep track of as well as a level 2 count but it's not so hard.

First of all, like a few others I reverse the polarity of a count, because it's easier for me to remember that high cards bring a count up and low cards bring it down. So for me, a negative count is beneficial. As I count, I say "even (for RC=0), down 2, down 3, down 1 (when I see a +2 card), up 1 (when I see another one)" Aces are letters, so after I see an ace I say "Up 3 A, up 2 A, up 2 B, even A, down 1 A, down 1 B (for the next aces)" and so on. In between rounds I create a mental picture of the count, paste "-11F" on my mental viewscreen then I can talk, talk about numbers, do whatever I want without losing track.

 

[Rob McGarvey]

Re: Counting "forward" with Negative Numbers

I really think that people that can grasp the concept of counting and can do it properly will have no trouble learning KO, HiLo, Zen, etc As you have done yourself, you have learned what works for you and made it your own. Zg was posting KO for newbies, and that does not include many of us here. I find newbies will get board of these "counting for dummies" counts, like KO and the speed count and will want to take on something with more teeth. Actually, if I was to post a message for newbies, I would tell them to learn basic strategy and play online ONLY for maximum BR return. But since this is a candle making class, no need to talk about halogen lighting. ;>

Thomas Edison

 

[Rob McGarvey]

Re: My thoughts on KO

I know what you are saying. The count I use is a very good one and I'd hate to get into something more or less difficult right now.