quack: counting one color

[quack]

I'm a new counter, and decided to go with an unbalanced system (Red 7). After about two weeks of practice, the sevens still slow me down a bit. My brain still has to consciously think "Red +, Black neutral" for some reason. Have others noticed this?..and if so, was it something that tended to let a little error creep in over time, or did it become second nature eventually. I seem to be much smoother just counting all the sevens as positive, a la KO.(The only downside to that is I would have to get the book.)

Quack

[Parker]

> I'm a new counter, and decided to go with an
> unbalanced system (Red 7). After about two
> weeks of practice, the sevens still slow me
> down a bit. My brain still has to
> consciously think "Red +, Black
> neutral" for some reason. Have others
> noticed this?..and if so, was it something
> that tended to let a little error creep in
> over time, or did it become second nature
> eventually. I seem to be much smoother just
> counting all the sevens as positive, a la
> KO.(The only downside to that is I would
> have to get the book.)

If spending $17.95 for a copy of Knockout Blackjack is going to create a severe financial hardship, then you probably should not be playing at all. :-)

Seriously, one cannot have too many blackjack books.

Another alternative is to continue using Red 7, but count all the 7's as one-half (.5). This actually improves the efficiency of the count slightly over merely counting the red 7's. All other aspects of the system (indices, bet ramping, etc.) remain unchanged.

[quack]

> If spending $17.95 for a copy of Knockout
> Blackjack is going to create a severe
> financial hardship, then you probably should
> not be playing at all. :-)

> Seriously, one cannot have too many
> blackjack books.

> Another alternative is to continue using Red
> 7, but count all the 7's as one-half (.5).
> This actually improves the efficiency of the
> count slightly over merely counting the red
> 7's. All other aspects of the system
> (indices, bet ramping, etc.) remain
> unchanged.

Hey Parker...it's sort of like golf instruction...you CAN have too many books :-)

In short, the heart of my question is do most people find Red 7 a touch harder to count than KO, or about the same?

[Parker]

> Hey Parker...it's sort of like golf
> instruction...you CAN have too many books
> :-)

Well, at last count I had over 35 BJ books, not counting back issues of BJF. I can honestly say that I learned something from nearly all of them, and I have every intention of buying more.

I figure that if I learn just one thing from a book that increases my EV even a miniscule amount, then in the long run that book will pay for itself many times over.

> In short, the heart of my question is do
> most people find Red 7 a touch harder to
> count than KO, or about the same?

Indeed, Red 7 is considered slightly more complex for these very reasons. As you found, counting only the red 7's is a little tricky. If we count all the sevens as .5, then strictly speaking, it is now a level two count.

[Sun Runner]

> In short, the heart of my question is do
> most people find Red 7 a touch harder to
> count than KO, or about the same?

The Red/Black sevens were throwing me off also, so I went to KO and found it relatively easy to learn.

If buying the book is a problem for you (and it shouldn't be) there are several websites around that, when compiled together, practically give you the KO system for free -at least basic KO.

But come on, buy the book; you'll be money ahead.

I personally have gone to Hi-Lo Lite -Arnold Snyder. I really like it for several reasons -but you didn't ask about that!

[Larry]

> The Red/Black sevens were throwing me off
> also, so I went to KO and found it
> relatively easy to learn.

> If buying the book is a problem for you (and
> it shouldn't be) there are several websites
> around that, when compiled together,
> practically give you the KO system for free
> -at least basic KO.

> But come on, buy the book; you'll be money
> ahead.

> I personally have gone to Hi-Lo Lite -Arnold
> Snyder. I really like it for several reasons
> -but you didn't ask about that!

I am intrested in the Hi-Lo Lite -Arnold Snyder. Can you tell me more about it. Is it easy to use? How much does it increase your game playing 2Decks,S17, DAS, D9,10,11, No surrender. Also is this the name of the book? I have KO. Which do your prefer and why?

[Sun Runner]

> I am intrested in the Hi-Lo Lite -Arnold
> Snyder. Can you tell me more about it. Is it
> easy to use?

Yes -every bit as easy, for me, as KO.

> How much does it increase your game playing two decks,S17, DAS, D9,10,11, No surrender.

That is hard for me to quantify. I play 6D almost exclusively -locale constraints. Single deck and DD opportunities for me are rare.

Read Chapter 10 (?) of BJA II for a definitive answer but I generally feel the difference in both would be marginal. Playing 2D, I might give the small advantage to Hi-Low.

> Also is this the name of the book?

The book is Blackbelt in Blackjack by Arnold Snyder.

> I have KO. Which do your prefer and ..

As I said earlier, Hi-Low Lite.

> why?

Primarily for this reason. I delude myself into believing that some day I too will have the opportunity to play BJ on a grander scale. I also realize my own limitations. To that end I am always interested in learning new skills above and beyond counting. I believe that using a balanced count system lends itself better to these other techniques. I also realize that I will probably never have the desire to incorporate anything other than a level 1 system into my game.

Also, being a bit "math challenged", I like the True Edge method of true counting outlined by Arnold Snyder in his book. I won't explain it here -read the book -but I like it's application.

No doubt the True-Edge style of TC'ing could be applied to a system like KO, but I have not taken the time to think about it.

Hope this helps.

BTW, there is a guy who posts here some -more frequently on Don's Domain -that has apparently had huge success using KO against 6D in AC. Apparently his success has been rather sizable. So, if KO works for you, don't throw it out "just because."

[Larry]

> Yes -every bit as easy, for me, as KO.

> That is hard for me to quantify. I play 6D
> almost exclusively -locale constraints.
> Single deck and DD opportunities for me are
> rare.

> Read Chapter 10 (?) of BJA II for a
> definitive answer but I generally feel the
> difference in both would be marginal.
> Playing 2D, I might give the small advantage
> to Hi-Low.

> The book is Blackbelt in Blackjack by Arnold
> Snyder.

> As I said earlier, Hi-Low Lite.

> Primarily for this reason. I delude myself
> into believing that some day I too will have
> the opportunity to play BJ on a grander
> scale. I also realize my own limitations. To
> that end I am always interested in learning
> new skills above and beyond counting. I
> believe that using a balanced count system
> lends itself better to these other
> techniques. I also realize that I will
> probably never have the desire to
> incorporate anything other than a level 1
> system into my game.

> Also, being a bit "math
> challenged", I like the True Edge
> method of true counting outlined by Arnold
> Snyder in his book. I won't explain it here
> -read the book -but I like it's application.

> No doubt the True-Edge style of TC'ing could
> be applied to a system like KO, but I have
> not taken the time to think about it.

> Hope this helps.

> BTW, there is a guy who posts here some
> -more frequently on Don's Domain -that has
> apparently had huge success using KO against
> 6D in AC. Apparently his success has been
> rather sizable. So, if KO works for you,
> don't throw it out "just because."

Thanks for takening the time to reply. I am always looking to improve my game. Most of the time I am playing a six deck shue. But recently their is a two deck shue that was put in by one of the casinos. I think i will pick up the book and give it a read. It never hurts to have to much knowledge. Thanks again and good luck!

[sam]

SR,

A very good, helpful response to this player's question. It also helped me. Thanks.

Sam

> Yes -every bit as easy, for me, as KO.

> That is hard for me to quantify. I play 6D
> almost exclusively -locale constraints.
> Single deck and DD opportunities for me are
> rare.

> Read Chapter 10 (?) of BJA II for a
> definitive answer but I generally feel the
> difference in both would be marginal.
> Playing 2D, I might give the small advantage
> to Hi-Low.

> The book is Blackbelt in Blackjack by Arnold
> Snyder.

> As I said earlier, Hi-Low Lite.

> Primarily for this reason. I delude myself
> into believing that some day I too will have
> the opportunity to play BJ on a grander
> scale. I also realize my own limitations. To
> that end I am always interested in learning
> new skills above and beyond counting. I
> believe that using a balanced count system
> lends itself better to these other
> techniques. I also realize that I will
> probably never have the desire to
> incorporate anything other than a level 1
> system into my game.

> Also, being a bit "math
> challenged", I like the True Edge
> method of true counting outlined by Arnold
> Snyder in his book. I won't explain it here
> -read the book -but I like it's application.

> No doubt the True-Edge style of TC'ing could
> be applied to a system like KO, but I have
> not taken the time to think about it.

> Hope this helps.

> BTW, there is a guy who posts here some
> -more frequently on Don's Domain -that has
> apparently had huge success using KO against
> 6D in AC. Apparently his success has been
> rather sizable. So, if KO works for you,
> don't throw it out "just because."