euphdude: A different approach to T-K-O?

[euphdude]

Hi All,

I've searched the archives extensively and it seems that most folks recommend true counting KO by the following method:

1. Start with an IRC based on the standard formula: - pivot times #-of-decks-in-play.

2. Divide by the # of decks remaining.

I found Brett Harris' formula: If P is the number of decks played, D is the number of decks remaining, RC is the Running Count and TC is the true count, then Brett's formula could be expressed as (RC - 4P)/D = TC, provided that you use zero as your initial running count (IRC). Using this method, wouldn't you be able to use the Hi-Lo indices for TKO? Or am I missing something?

Thanks,
Euphdude

[Parker]

> Hi All,

> I've searched the archives extensively and
> it seems that most folks recommend true
> counting KO by the following method:

> 1. Start with an IRC based on the standard
> formula: - pivot times #-of-decks-in-play.

> 2. Divide by the # of decks remaining.

> I found Brett Harris' formula: If P is the
> number of decks played, D is the number of
> decks remaining, RC is the Running Count and
> TC is the true count, then Brett's formula
> could be expressed as (RC - 4P)/D = TC,
> provided that you use zero as your initial
> running count (IRC). Using this method,
> wouldn't you be able to use the Hi-Lo
> indices for TKO? Or am I missing something?

That would work . . . I think.

But wouldn't it be a lot easier to use the accepted method (adjust for pivot point of 0), and simply subtract 4 from each of the Hi-lo indices?

Of course, I would imagine that anyone serious about using TKO would want a set of indices generated specifically for this count. The Hi-lo numbers will be in the ballpark, but there will be a few differences since TKO counts the 7.

[euphdude]

> That would work . . . I think.

> But wouldn't it be a lot easier to use the
> accepted method (adjust for pivot point of
> 0), and simply subtract 4 from each of the
> Hi-lo indices?

Thanks Parker...you are probably right, I should just stick with the accepted method. The calculation should be faster that way anyhow.

Question for John...I read on the BJRM website that the software includes indices for TKO. Do you have the full indices available or just the Ill 18/Fab 4?

Question for Parker...you had mentioned in an earlier post about writing a book dealing with tweaking KO with some true counted adjustments. When will this be released?

Thanks much.

[Cacarulo]

Here are the catch-22 indices for 6D,S17,DOA,DAS,SPA1,SPL3,NS,5/6,floored

INS  = -1 

16vT = -4 

15vT =  0 

16v9 =  2 

12v6 = -5 

12v5 = -6 

12v4 = -4 

12v3 = -2 

12v2 = -1 

13v3 = -6 

13v2 = -5 

11vA = -3 

10vA = -1 

10vT = -1 

 9v7 =  0 

 8v6 = -2 

 8v5 =  0 

 9v2 = -3 

A8v6 = -3 

A8v5 = -3 

TTv6 =  1 

TTv5 =  1

Sincerely,
Cac

[euphdude]

[Don Schlesinger]

Note that, in most cases, you can simply add four to the TKO indices to get the equivalent Hi-Lo indices. But, this shouldn't be "automatic," as, anytime one system counts a particular rank (in this case, the 7) and another doesn't, we can't assume a perfect correspondence between the pairs of indices.

Don

[euphdude]

Hi Cac,

If you don't mind my asking, what software did you use to generate these indices?

Many thanks.

Euphdude

[Cacarulo]

> If you don't mind my asking, what software
> did you use to generate these indices?

I don't remember very well because they were generated a long time ago. I suppose it was my own program but could have been SBA. Can't say for sure.

Sincerely,
Cac