# Thread: JB: Counting with KO

1. ## Don Schlesinger: You really don't understand

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

> But first,

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

I explained this once, but you seem to have ignored it. there is an imbalance of 4 small cards with every deck in K-O. [/i]Without having any excess whatsoever,[/i] after two decks are gone, you expect the -24 RC to have increased to by 8 to -16. You have no edge because of that increase at all. If, in reality, there are now 12 excess small cards dealt in addition to the 8 expected,, then the RC is -4. Dividing by 4, the TC becomes -1. You make a larger bet, because, as a TKO player, you know that TC = -1 means a nice advantage.

You don't have to relate anything to Hi-Lo. Some people don't know Hi-Lo exists.

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

> [Have I jumped the track yet?]

Yes, you have. See above.

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

Nothing at all. You relate it to values that mean something to a TKO player.

> Play like I never heard of HILO in my life.

Exactly! See, you're learning already! :-)

> Where do I go to find out that the number -3
> above is telling me I have an approx 1.5%

>

To TKO books, articles, posts, etc.

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

Patience, patience.

Don

2. ## Cacarulo: Maybe another example could help

First, let's forget about Hi-Lo for know.

You're a TKO player and start playing a 6D shoe. Your IRC (initial running count) is -24 (-4*#decks) and your ITC (initial TC) is -24/6 = -4.
Say only 12 small cards (2-7) were dealt after the first round. Your RC is now updated as follows:

RC = IRC + 12 = -24 + 12 = -12
Since there are still 6D remaining (5.77 to be precise) your TC is now updated to:

TC = -12/6 = -2

If at this moment you see 4 big cards (A,T) coming out of the shoe your RC would be updated as:

RC = -12 - 4 = -16. As you can see the IRC is no longer required. It is used only at the beginning
of the shoe.

Now enters Hi-Lo. Suppose you wanted to know what your advantage is, as a TKO player, when your TC is -2.
The answer is simple: It is approximately the same advantage a Hi-Lo player would have when his TC is +2 (-2 + 4).

That's all.

Hope this helps.

Cac

4. ## Praying Mantis: Huh? Hello?

> You're a TKO player and start playing a 6D
> shoe. Your IRC (initial running count) is
> -24 (-4*#decks) and your ITC (initial TC) is
> -24/6 = -4.

Huh? I checked again and the formulae for KO is 4-(4*#decks)or -20 for 6 Deck, not -24. Anyway, that is what I've been using for 6 Deck.

My thoughts on all of this. I am a KO player and have thought about moving to TKO, but does TKO have an advantage over Hi-Lo? I don't know. But that is what I want to know.

Simply, if TKO has no more of an advantage over regular TC Hi-Lo, I will just move to Hi-Lo. It would be a lot simpler to count Hi-Lo and TC than go thru all the mental gymnastics of dealing with negative numbers with TKO, even with Parker's TKO.

So, for me, is TKO gonna give me a bigger edge at the tables than Hi-Lo? General consensus is that it will. If so, I guess I will deal with those negative numbers.

I'm basically a "simpleton" and don't like to muddy the waters too much. So...if Parker is reading this...get that damn book out so we can decide.

Thanks for all your input, I greatly appreciate them all.

PM

5. ## Cacarulo: Re: Huh? Hello?

> Huh? I checked again and the formulae for KO
> is 4-(4*#decks)or -20 for 6 Deck, not -24.
> Anyway, that is what I've been using for 6
> Deck.

Yes, that's correct for KO but not for TKO. In fact, for KO you can use any IRC but for TKO you must use only one.

> My thoughts on all of this. I am a KO player
> and have thought about moving to TKO, but
> does TKO have an advantage over Hi-Lo? I
> don't know. But that is what I want to know.

Yes, definitely. I've posted some SCOREs in the past that you may want to see. Just do a search on this site and you'll find them.

> Simply, if TKO has no more of an advantage
> over regular TC Hi-Lo, I will just move to
> Hi-Lo. It would be a lot simpler to count
> Hi-Lo and TC than go thru all the mental
> gymnastics of dealing with negative numbers
> with TKO, even with Parker's TKO.

KO is almost the same as Hi-Lo. Also, I would say that it's better when you have a deeply dealt game.

> So, for me, is TKO gonna give me a bigger
> edge at the tables than Hi-Lo? General
> consensus is that it will. If so, I guess I
> will deal with those negative numbers.

Yes.

> Thanks for all your input, I greatly
> appreciate them all.

You're welcome.

Sincerely,
Cac

6. ## Sun Runner: Re: Huh? Hello?

> Huh? I checked again and the formulae for KO
> is 4-(4*#decks)or -20 for 6 Deck, not -24.

For the disussion we are having, the IRC is -24 as has been stated. What that is doing is adjusting KO's pivot to zero.

> My thoughts on all of this. I am a KO player
> and have thought about moving to TKO, but
> does TKO have an advantage over Hi-Lo?

Each game is different, but for a particular shoe game and spread that Cacarulo has posted numbers on, TKO has a signifigant advantage over HILO.

> Simply, if TKO has no more of an advantage
> over regular TC Hi-Lo, I will just move to
> Hi-Lo.

Of course the term 'TC Hi-Lo' is redundant; HILO is by default true counted. Again, I believe it does in certain shoe games and certain spreads.

> It would be a lot simpler to count
> Hi-Lo and TC than go thru all the mental
> gymnastics of dealing with negative numbers
> with TKO, even with Parker's TKO.

That is certainly debatable.

> So, for me, is TKO gonna give me a bigger
> edge at the tables than Hi-Lo?

For shoe games with larger spreads? Probabaly.

> If so, I guess I will deal with those negative numbers.

KO and negative numbers are not that tough, and you can avoid them. It just takes a little tweaking.

> I'm basically a "simpleton"

Some would say I am also.

7. ## Parker: Re: I'll let it go for now.

I think the problem is due to your trying to make a comparison in running count mode.

We can compare in true count mode and say that TKO TC -4 = Hi-lo TC 0, or TKO TC 0 = Hi-lo TC +4.

We cannot do the same in running count mode because the running count in an unbalanced system behaves differently than in a balanced system.

Suppose we have a shoe that has somehow ended up with the high and low cards distributed in a perfectly even manner throughout the shoe. If we are using Hi-lo, the running count will start at 0 and essentially stay there. Since 0 divided by anything is zero, the TC will stay at 0 throughout the shoe.

The unbalanced count will start at -24 (IRC). Since there are 6 decks remaining to be dealt, the TC is -4. Since this is an evenly distributed shoe, the RC will increase by 4 for each deck dealt. So for example, with two decks dealt (and four decks remaining) the RC will now be -16, and the TC will be . . . (drum roll) -4! In other words, the RC will increase by 4 per deck from -24 to 0, but the TC will remain at -4 (which, as we have already established, corresponds to Hi-lo TC 0 - just what we expect in this neutral shoe).

So, for the TC to increase, we have to see small cards coming out at a rate in excess of 4 cards per deck. However, the method of TC conversion allows for this without you having to do anything else. I think that this is what you are getting hung up on.

BTW, don't worry about having difficulty grasping this, and don't be shy about continuing to ask. This is actually proving quite helpful to me with the book I'm writing.

8. ## Praying Mantis: Yeah, I understand Now

> For the disussion we are having, the IRC is
> -24 as has been stated. What that is doing
> is adjusting KO's pivot to zero.

Yep, Cac set me straight...going back and rereading the thread brought it in line...thanx.

> posted numbers on, TKO has a signifigant

That's why I probably will move to TKO; however, UBZII is very inticing.

> KO and negative numbers are not that tough,
> and you can avoid them. It just takes a
> little tweaking.

I don't find any problems with the negs but my point was that if TKO and HiLo were basically equal, why even deal with them at all? Since they obviously AREN'T equal...

Thanks,

PM

9. ## Cacarulo: Re: Yeah, I understand Now

> Yep, Cac set me straight...going back and
> line...thanx.

> That's why I probably will move to TKO;
> however, UBZII is very inticing.

The beauty of a system played in RC mode is that you don't make estimation errors. Since you can't play perfect in a TCed system I would say that in this case UBZII is a better choice. However, you have to deal with a level-2 count.

Sincerely,
Cac

10. ## Hollywood: Re: Counting with KO

> I took this to mean he starts with an IRC of
> -40 and counts down, so the count is always
> negetive but the negetive can generally be
> disregarded unless the RC becomes extremely
> high (some problem!)

> JB

You are exactly correct.

Hollywood

Page 3 of 4 First 1234 Last

#### Posting Permissions

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