Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 38

Thread: JB: Counting with KO

  1. #11
    Parker
    Guest

    Parker: Re: Counting with KO

    > Also, I'm thinking it might be easier to
    > minimize negative numbers by making my IRC
    > say +5. Assuming a 6 deck shoe, what would
    > be my new pivot point, key count, and matrix
    > value?

    I recommend adjusting the IRC for a pivot point of 0. For 6D, this would mean an IRC of -24, and a key count of -8.

    Yes, this means that you will be dealing with negative numbers most of the time. People are apprehensive about this for whatever reason, but it only takes a few hours of practice for most people to become comfortable with negative numbers. It is time well spent.

    Why use a pivot point of zero? Because, eventually, you will consider true-counting KO. I know you will. Everybody does. :-)

    Using a pivot of zero makes true-counting incredibly easy, as all you have to do is divide by number of unseen decks, just as with a balanced count.

    Even if you do not wish to use KO in TC mode all the time or learn TC indices, an occasional quick TC conversion can be used to check if you are missing any advantage when the RC climbs rapidly early in the shoe. Again, with a pivot of zero this is very easy to do.

  2. #12
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: I wholeheartedly agree! *NM*


  3. #13
    Sun Runner
    Guest

    Sun Runner: Clarification, again ..

    > Using a pivot of zero makes true-counting
    > incredibly easy, as all you have to do is
    > divide by number of unseen decks, just as
    > with a balanced count.

    Maybe this time will do it for me, but I don't get the simplicity .. what am I missing?

    6D shoe, 2 decks gone, 4 remain.
    12 net excess small cards dealt.
    HILO calls it RC +12. KO calls it RC -8.
    What is the TC?

    6D shoe, 2 decks gone, 4 remain.
    12 net excess big cards dealt.
    HILO calls it RC -12. KO calls it RC -32.
    What is the TC?

    Sorry to be so dense.

  4. #14
    Cacarulo
    Guest

    Cacarulo: Re: Clarification, again ..

    > Maybe this time will do it for me, but I
    > don't get the simplicity .. what am I
    > missing?

    > 6D shoe, 2 decks gone, 4 remain.
    > 12 net excess small cards dealt.
    > HILO calls it RC +12. KO calls it RC -8.
    > What is the TC?

    If you started the RC at -24 and 12 net excess small cards were dealt then KO calls for -12.
    TC = -12/4 = -3. For Hi-Lo it would be +12/4 = +3 in this particular example.
    If the RC is -8 it means that 16 net excess small cards were dealt. That would be -8/4 = -2
    In average a TC of 0 for TKO means a TC of +4 for Hi-Lo.

    > 6D shoe, 2 decks gone, 4 remain.
    > 12 net excess big cards dealt.
    > HILO calls it RC -12. KO calls it RC -32.
    > What is the TC?

    You can work this out for homework

    Sincerely,
    Cac

  5. #15
    Sun Runner
    Guest

    Sun Runner: Re: Clarification, again ..

    > You can work this out for homework

    Thanks, I just wanted someone else to voice the answer and see if it still sounded ridiculous to me.

    > If you started the RC at -24 and 12 net
    > excess small cards were dealt then KO calls
    > for -12. TC = -12/4 = -3.

    > For Hi-Lo it would be +12/4 = +3.

    The TC is indeed plus 3. Except for KO users, it is -3.

    Parker says "using a pivot of zero makes true-counting (an un-balanced count) incredibly easy, as all you have to do is divide by number of unseen decks, just as with a balanced count."

    Incredibly easy I guess if you don't mind using the KO decoder ring to let you know that TC -3 is really what the rest of the world commonly refers to as +3.

    Somehow as a counter I was hoping the KO TC process would return the universally accepted answer at that place in the deck of 'plus 3' .. an answer that would be meaningful without anymore thought going in to it.

    I really don't have a grudge against un-balanced counts and I'm not trying to be difficult; I'm just looking for that ease of use.

    Parker -looking forward to the book. I'm sure it will be clear enough then.

  6. #16
    Don Schlesinger
    Guest

    Don Schlesinger: No, wrong

    > Thanks, I just wanted someone else to voice
    > the answer and see if it still sounded
    > ridiculous to me.

    > The TC is indeed plus 3. Except for KO
    > users, it is -3.

    No, it's -1!

    > Parker says "using a pivot of zero
    > makes true-counting (an un-balanced count)
    > incredibly easy, as all you have to do is
    > divide by number of unseen decks, just as
    > with a balanced count."

    > Incredibly easy I guess if you don't mind
    > using the KO decoder ring to let you know
    > that TC -3 is really what the rest of the
    > world commonly refers to as +3.

    K-O true counts are always four lower than Hi-Lo true counts. In the example above, the reference was to 12 excess small cards. This would be in addition to the imbalance of 8 small cards that you get for dealing two decks. So, the RC is -4, not -12, and the K-O TC is -4/4 = -1, not -12/4 = -3.

    > Somehow as a counter I was hoping the KO TC
    > process would return the universally
    > accepted answer at that place in the deck of
    > 'plus 3' .. an answer that would be
    > meaningful without anymore thought going in
    > to it.

    Live with it! :-)

    > I really don't have a grudge against
    > un-balanced counts and I'm not trying to be
    > difficult; I'm just looking for that ease of
    > use.

    The problem is what you start with. If it's Hi-Lo, then anything else seems "strange" to you; if it's K-O, right out of the box, you don't have the comparison to Hi-Lo to confuse you.

    Don

  7. #17
    Parker
    Guest

    Parker: Re: Clarification, again ..

    Just remember one simple fact, and things should fall into place for you:

    TKO TC 0 = Hi-lo TC +4

    In other words, you'd want to start ramping your bets up at KO TC -3.


  8. #18
    Sun Runner
    Guest

    Sun Runner: OK .. I've got it now. :)

    First, thank you both because for the first time I really do get it.

    Now, for the requisite sarcasm. Although, in every joke there is a hint of truth!

    I'll begin with Parker's statement ..

    "Using a pivot of zero makes true-counting incredibly easy, as all you have to do is divide by number of unseen decks, just as with a balanced count."

    Is that right.

    TC'ing a 6D shoe with a balanced count ..
    1. Keep the RC, starting with zero.
    2. Divide by unseen decks.

    TC'ing a 6D shoe with KO ..
    1. Keep the RC, after starting deep in the negative hole with an IRC of -24.
    2. Park the current negative RC in #1 off to the side of the brain, then, multipy the number of decks in the discard tray by 4.
    3. Add #1 and the answer in #2 together. (Already forgot #1? Ooops.)
    4. Divide the answer found in #3 by number of unseen decks.
    5. Add '4' to the answer determined in #4. Or, just start remembering that TKO -5 is really -1; TKO -1 is really +3, etc, etc.

    Presto!

    6. Be sure and sit as far away from first base as possible -you'll need the extra time.

    1a. Adjust the negative IRC by some arbitrary large positive number; but be prepared to adjust, and keep adjusting, all other known landmarks along the way.

    I'm not out to bag on KO; I believe KO, straight out of the box, gives HILO a run for the money anyway. And TKO is the bomb as a counting system. I just find statements regarding it's ease of use, once it begins to get modified, a little simplistic.

    Refering back to some other recent posts, if you plan to bring KO to the ST'ing party, I'm guessing more mental gymnastics will be in order.

    Thanks again fellas; I mean that. It took both your posts for me to see the light and confirm what I thought was true .. TC'ing KO is hard work!!


  9. #19
    Parker
    Guest

    Parker: Re: OK .. I've got it now. :)

    I have no idea what you're talking about with #2 and #3. You start with the IRC for a zero pivot point (-24 for 6 deck) and divide by the unseen decks.

    That's it. That's all.

    If you want to know an equivalent Hi-lo count, you would indeed add +4 to the TC (#5), but there is no reason to even be concerned with that. You would just learn a bet ramp starting to ramp up at TC -3. Your indices would be adjusted as well (example: 16 vs 10 = -4).

    I'm not saying that it would be easy for someone already comfortable with Hi-lo to switch to TKO, nor do I recommend that they do so.

    However, for someone starting out with KO and with no pre-conceived ideas regarding TC already in their mind, adding a TC conversion would be fairly trivial, expecially if (as I recommend) they learn it with the pivot point standardized to 0 from day one.

  10. #20
    Sun Runner
    Guest

    Sun Runner: I'll let it go for now.

    I'm sure it is crystal clear to everyone else.

    But first,

    > I have no idea what you're talking about .. you start with the IRC for a zero pivot point
    > (-24 for 6 deck) and divide by the unseen decks. That's it. That's all.

    2 decks gone, 4 decks unseen, twelve excess small cards played, IRC is -24, RC is now -12.

    Divide RC -12 by 4 and get your KO TC of -3.

    [Have I jumped the track yet?]

    What does that mean to me? What do I relate that number to?

    Play like I never heard of HILO in my life.

    Where do I go to find out that the number -3 above is telling me I have an approx 1.5% increase in my advantage?



    I'm still smiling, but I'm beginning to sound like SSR and I don't like it very much.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.