winnawinna
Well-Known Member
Does anyone here use the Red 7 count. I have started using it and really like it for its ease of use, but I would love to hear from other 7 users and any tips on playing would be great.
Red 7 Count
- Thread starter winnawinna
- Start date
zengrifter
Banned
R7 is a great count and nearly identical to KISS3.
bjcardcounter
Well-Known Member
I play 100% shoe and I only use it. I do not think it is simpler than any level 1 counting system. If you think you can do away with deck estimation, you could be wrong- Advanced Red 7 betting strategy requires you to estimate decks.winnawinna said:
winnawinna
Well-Known Member
Well I was playing strickly green chips but since I took a hit on my BR I will start in the "red" and spread to green. According to Snyder, the Red 7 captures most of the advantages of the Hi-Lo and other level one balanced counts. It also out-performs the KO in multi deck games (by a fraction). I like the HI-LO and Red 7 and they are both esy to use but the Red7 is easy for me and I am able to count very quickly.FLASH1296 said:
Let us compare
Red seven is slightly better than HILO in BC,PE and IC. Hard to argue that its not slightly better. If its simpler to use that is on more in its favor. That makes the comparison score Red seven 4 HILO 0. I wonder what other level 1 counts Snyder was referring to when he used the term "most of the advantage".winnawinna said:
Last edited:
David Spence
Member
If you only plan to count, Red 7 and KO are both fine counts, even if you start playing for higher stakes. Their performance is identical for all practical purposes. Hi-Lo has the advantage of being useful for more advanced methods of play, such as shuffle tracking. It also performs slightly better than Red 7 and KO, especially if you use many indexes.
The bottom line: if you're comfortable with Red 7 and don't plan to shuffle track, play on teams, etc., there isn't much to be gained by moving to Hi-Lo, and you certainly don't need to move "up" to a higher-level count, regardless of stakes.
*I just noticed the post above about Red 7 having better correlations than Hi-Lo. This may be true, but you can't directly compare correlations for balanced and unbalanced counts; a sim is the most accurate way to compare different count systems. In any event, the differences are slight.
The bottom line: if you're comfortable with Red 7 and don't plan to shuffle track, play on teams, etc., there isn't much to be gained by moving to Hi-Lo, and you certainly don't need to move "up" to a higher-level count, regardless of stakes.
*I just noticed the post above about Red 7 having better correlations than Hi-Lo. This may be true, but you can't directly compare correlations for balanced and unbalanced counts; a sim is the most accurate way to compare different count systems. In any event, the differences are slight.
Last edited:
winnawinna
Well-Known Member
I agree that it makes little difference to switch to a higher level count. I do like the simplicity of the Red 7. So far it has given me good results. Id love to know my actual score for the game I am playing so if someone has CVCX please do a sim.tthree said:
FLASH1296
Well-Known Member
winnawinna,
You are more likely to be a winnawinna than a loserloser
if you stop focusing on ease of use and simplicity; and start studying
and practicing [superior] Level Two (balanced) counts.
I suggest that the Zen Count is the best compromise for you,
as it does not require any side-counts.
You are more likely to be a winnawinna than a loserloser
if you stop focusing on ease of use and simplicity; and start studying
and practicing [superior] Level Two (balanced) counts.
I suggest that the Zen Count is the best compromise for you,
as it does not require any side-counts.
winnawinna
Well-Known Member
LOL I like the sound of that. Does the Zen count have many indices?FLASH1296 said:
FLASH1296
Well-Known Member
All strong counts have from 50−200 indices; but less than 20 are actually
important to know. I use 100 [± 20] depending on the game, but I am not
a recreational player.
An elementary school child can easily learn a handful of numbers like:
"Sixteen vs. Ten equals Zero" [16 v. 10 = 0]
How is that difficult ?
Anyone can win or lose, but those whose play is efficacious, Merit credit for good news, and find the adverse less vexatious.
winnawinna
Well-Known Member
Flash, I am a recreational player since I have a career but I would like BJ to become an addition to my salary. I normally go 1-2 times a week sometimes more.FLASH1296 said:
zengrifter
Banned
It would be important NOT to learn the 1/4D TC "true edge" version in the current publication of BBIBJ and instead learn the 1983 version indices...winnawinna said:
... OR create new indices for either 1DTC or 2DTC
Alternatively, there is the UB'd Zen RC system, a step up from R7, or Renzey's Mentor.
Personally, I advise just stick with R7. zg
FLASH1296
Well-Known Member
The ¼ deck "true edge" fiasco should not be foisted on anyone; which is why, shortly after publishing that drivel,
and suffering a firestorm of ugly feedback; Snyder posted an updated matrix of (profit-maximizing) indices on his website.
I had already informed the poster that I can send him a nice fresh set of Risk Averse indices when he is ready to switch.
winnawinna
Well-Known Member
So if I stay with the Red 7, should I not use the true edge system? Conrad Membrino has a "truing the red 7" page on AS's site that uses runnign counts which are converted into true counts based on decks played.zengrifter said:
zengrifter
Banned
May I have too, please. zgFLASH1296 said:
zengrifter
Banned
That would be better, or you will need a set of 1DTC R7 indices. Also, the R7 becomes de facto level-2 count once you count all 7s as +0.50winnawinna said:
But really, I think you can simply use R7 - not advanced - after you get your BR together. zg
winnawinna
Well-Known Member
Well my BR is ready to go although now I will be playing at lower stakes. I plan on going back this week lol. So you think I should just go with the Simple Red 7? What are the 1DTC indices? BTW, I just read your interview from years back....good stuffzengrifter said:
UK-21
Well-Known Member
I started with this when I first started playing and studying the game. I moved to hi-lo, with the deck estimation to do, as I found this system easier to analyse and determine tipping points when calculating advantages etc. But it was only me being a numbers bore that brought about this change.winnawinna said:
The other downside if you take it straight out of Mr Snyder's BBiBJ, are the limited number of indices. There's none for say, A4v4 (a BS double down play with just about nothing to separate it from a straight hit when playing off the top), so you could end up putting out a max bet during a very negative count with a negative expectation. With Fred Renzey's KISS count, the unbalanced basis is the same but there are more indices to complement it.
If you use R7 and stuggle with the negative counts, just start at 8 for a 6 deck shoe. Ramp up point will be 20, and if the count goes below zero it's time to find a reason to take a break.
This is all just my opinion though.
Good cards.