Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 20

Thread: A10Ploppy: T/C UBZ2

  1. #1
    A10Ploppy
    Guest

    A10Ploppy: T/C UBZ2

    This is my first post here, I've been lurking for a while though so be gentle.

    I made the switch from KO to UBZ2 recently and found the transition to be much easier than I thought it would be and have had very good results so far. I want to start looking into true counting UBZ2 but haven't been able to find a lot of info on the boards. What I'm looking for is what to use for irc and how accurate I should try to be in deck estimation (I have to admit that I'm completely ignorant when it comes to balanced counts since I've always used unbalanced counts). I can generate the indices with CVData.

    I'm also considering just switching to Zen but I like the idea of being able to switch back to the unbalanced count if the conditions aren't conducive to the added effort required.

    I guess I should also add that I play primarily 2d and 6d, let me know if more details are needed.

    Thanks in advance for any help.

  2. #2
    Parker
    Guest

    Parker: Re: T/C UBZ2

    UBZ2 is true-counted the same as any unbalanced count. Determine the IRC with this formula:

    IRC = -(unbalance factor) x (number of decks)

    Since UBZ2 is unbalanced by a factor of 4, this becomes:

    IRC = -4 x (number of decks)

    So, we get an IRC of -4 for single deck, -8 for double deck, -24 for six deck shoe, etc. This means that our pivot point will always be 0, regardless of the number of decks.

    Then we simply divide the running count by the number of unseen whole decks to determine the true count.

    Since the pivot (TC=0) is roughly equivalent to a Hi=lo TC of +2, we want to start ramping up around TC -1.

    Ideally, of course, software such as CVCX should be used to develop an optimal betting ramp, and CVData to get a full set of indices.

    I true-count UBZ2 when playing shoes, and use it in running count mode for single and double deck games.

  3. #3
    Praying Mantis
    Guest

    Praying Mantis: Don will correct me if I'm Wrong

    > This is my first post here, I've been lurking for a
    > while though so be gentle.

    Welcome, and don't be shy, just jump right on in. Don, Viktor, Parker and the others here will go out their way to NOT make you feel intimidated.

    > I made the switch from KO to UBZ2 recently and found
    > the transition to be much easier than I thought it
    > would be and have had very good results so far. I want
    > to start looking into true counting UBZ2 but haven't
    > been able to find a lot of info on the boards. What
    > I'm looking for is what to use for irc and how
    > accurate I should try to be in deck estimation (I have
    > to admit that I'm completely ignorant when it comes to
    > balanced counts since I've always used unbalanced
    > counts). I can generate the indices with CVData.

    Well, I, too have been playing around with UBZ II. (I use KO now) Truthfully, I keep waiting on Parker to release his book on TKO first before I completely lose myself in it.

    Anyway, I believe BJA shows that UBZ II is powerful enough just the way it is without TC it. It hangs right up there with the big boys already.

    Why true count it in the first place? May as well just use Zen or another. Then, again, isn't the reason we use KO and UBZ II because they are unbalanced and DON'T require a TC? (We're lazy, remember?) The power is in their simplicity and is what makes both so attractive!

    Personally, I believe that if I don't use TKO, Why TC any other system like Zen or Hi-Lo. If I feel I need to TC, then I may as well go all-out and acquire the Rolls-Royce and learn Hi-Opt II and sidecount aces, as well.

    PM

  4. #4
    Don Schlesinger
    Guest

    Don Schlesinger: Re: Don will correct me if I'm Wrong

    Yes, I tend to agree with you. Unbalanced counts are alluring for their simplicity and ease of use. Then, as soon as players get comfortable with them, they want to make them more complicated! :-)

    True-counting any unbalanced count makes it more powerful. So, if that's what you want to do (true count), may as well also investigate the balanced counts and decide just how powerful you care to get. Then, you can look at all the SCORE comparisons and take your pick!

    Don

  5. #5
    Parker
    Guest

    Parker: True-counting unbalanced systems

    > Well, I, too have been playing around with UBZ II. (I
    > use KO now) Truthfully, I keep waiting on Parker to
    > release his book on TKO first before I completely lose
    > myself in it.

    Working on it! :-)

    > Anyway, I believe BJA shows that UBZ II is powerful
    > enough just the way it is without TC it. It hangs
    > right up there with the big boys already.

    > Why true count it in the first place? May as well just
    > use Zen or another. Then, again, isn't the reason we
    > use KO and UBZ II because they are unbalanced and
    > DON'T require a TC? (We're lazy, remember?) The power
    > is in their simplicity and is what makes both so
    > attractive!

    Your point is certainly a valid one. Besides, I try to avoid contradicting Don whenever possible. :-)

    As I have said many times, KO (and UBZ2) work just fine in running count mode.

    > Personally, I believe that if I don't use TKO, Why TC
    > any other system like Zen or Hi-Lo. If I feel I need
    > to TC, then I may as well go all-out and acquire the
    > Rolls-Royce and learn Hi-Opt II and sidecount aces, as
    > well.

    Ace sidecounts are a pain, especially in shoe games.

    A true-counted UBZ2 will out-perform Zen, just as TKO out-performs Hi-lo.

    If someone is already thoroughly comfortable with KO or UBZ2, true-counting provides a way to increase EV without having to learn new tag values. That's really the bottom line.

    Of course, the same can be said for figuring out ways to increase bet spread, wonging out on negative counts, learning more indices, adding side counts, etc.

  6. #6
    A10Ploppy
    Guest

    A10Ploppy: Re: True-counting unbalanced systems

    Thanks for the info, it's just what I'm looking for.

    I'm still not sure if this is the direction I'm going to take it, I don't want to fall into the trap of making something that works great as it is and make it more difficult simply for the sake of self punishment. I was just surprised at how fast I came up to speed with UBZ2 and it doesn't seem like much more effort true count it as well (famous last words...).

  7. #7
    Praying Mantis
    Guest

    Praying Mantis: TKO and UBZ II

    > Your point is certainly a valid one. Besides, I try to
    > avoid contradicting Don whenever possible. :-)

    Don't we all. The wrath of Don can stay with us for a long time. Just kidding, Don...just kidding.

    > As I have said many times, KO (and UBZ2) work just
    > fine in running count mode.

    > Ace sidecounts are a pain, especially in shoe games.

    That's why I have no desire to learn Hi-Opt II. I have enough trouble keeping a running count, verses having to true it out, then keeping aces, fives, or whatever on the side. I only have so many fingers now and a very feeble brain.

    > A true-counted UBZ2 will out-perform Zen, just as TKO
    > out-performs Hi-lo.

    I knew TKO outperformed Hi-Lo, but I didn't know that TC UBZ II would outperform Zen. Maybe he has a point then.

    Afterall, that's why I havn't converted to UBZ II yet. I have everything in order for KO already, and if I decide to TC it, it will outperform UBZ II.

    For me, I think it's really gonna depend on how well I can use a level 2 system. I am practicing UBZ II tags now, but I am S L O W.

    When you switched from KO to UBZ II did you experience the same problem or is it just me? Man, it is much more difficult counting multi-levels, especially when trying to cancel out pairs. When I have, say a 2 and a 5 my brain still wants to count it as 2 and I have to stop and regroup and that slows me down. I can't be doing that at the tables, for sure. Should I try to memorize pair cancellations or just keep doing it until the brain gets a grasp of it?

    If I can't pick up the speed and get it right, I will have no choice but to stay with KO. Then again, I haven't attempted TC yet, that may be as difficult changing levels, though I doubt it.

    Sorry this kind of got off topic, but your comments got me think...as always. Thanks.

    PM

  8. #8
    Praying Mantis
    Guest

    Praying Mantis: Surprise ME ;)

    > I was just surprised at how fast I came up to speed
    > with UBZ2 and it doesn't seem like much more effort
    > true count it as well (famous last words...).

    I guess our brains work differently.

    In truthfullness, though, I haven't really put a lot of effort in practicing, either. I'm still on the fence whether or not I want to go to UBZ II or TKO. Probably, if I devote some serious time to it, probably would come to me a little bit better, what you say? How did you do it?

    Thanks,

    PM

  9. #9
    A10Ploppy
    Guest

    A10Ploppy: Re: Surprise ME ;)

    What I did to get up to speed was pretty much the same as I did for KO. First I memorized the tags and counting down the deck. Then focused on canceling cards out and keeping the running count. At that point I didn't even concern myself with the indices. This took about a day to get proficient at.

    My next step was to go to a local $2 game and find a nice slow dealer and flat bet it. The comforting part for me was that this first session felt like my first session at KO. It was comforting to me since my first few ko sessions I felt like a slug but it gradually got better and more natural with practice, this really felt no different. I chose to go to a live game so early so I could get used to the distractions as early on as possible. After a couple sessions I was able to keep the count very easily and act natural, conversing with the dealer, pit and other players. I also had my wife come with me once to get her thoughts afterwards and she didn't even realize I was counting.

    Finally I focused on what for me was the hardest part, learning the indices. This one took about a week to get comfortable with. From there it's just been constant practice to hone my skill.

    One tool that for me has been invaluable (besides CVData/CVBJ) has been Deepnets Blackjack Counter and Expert. I have them on my Treo (palm based cell phone) so any time I have a minute or two to spare I'll launch it and run through one of the drills. I find this very helpful since the surroundings are always different, one time I may be in "the library" other times maybe in line at the grocery store. This greatly increases the amount of practice time I get without having to be tied to my laptop for hours at a time and helps balance time with the family.

    Overall I'm very happy I made the switch, I've gone back to KO a couple times it feels like going from a little 4 cylinder truck to a monster V8 diesel. You get to the point where after counting down a deck you can fairly accurately guess the composition of the remaining few cards (something I never thought I'd be able to do since I'm not one of those people with extraordinary mental capabilities).

    Anyway, not sure if that was helpful or not, I'm not the greatest at making what's in my head come out in writing.

  10. #10
    Praying Mantis
    Guest

    Praying Mantis: I need to make a decision

    > What I did to get up to speed was pretty much the same
    > as I did for KO. First I memorized the tags and
    > counting down the deck. Then focused on canceling
    > cards out and keeping the running count. At that point
    > I didn't even concern myself with the indices. This
    > took about a day to get proficient at.

    How many hours in that day?

    I just need to make a decision. I've done my due-diligence and now it is time to make the decision. Thanks for your thoughts.

    PM


  11. #11
    George C.
    Guest

    George C.: KISS

    (Anyway, I believe BJA shows that UBZ II is powerful enough just the way it is without TC it. It hangs right up there with the big boys already.

    Why true count it in the first place? May as well just use Zen or another. Then, again, isn't the reason we use KO and UBZ II because they are unbalanced and DON'T require a TC? (We're lazy, remember?) The power is in their simplicity and is what makes both so attractive)

    Exactly!!

    Many years ago Don and I talked about this very thing and arrived at the same conclusion. I constructed a system to be both powerful and simple. The UBZ2 has proven to be just that, just the way it is. John Auston sent me his work on a TCUBZ2 and I believe it may be archived on this site, if you have to have a true count version of UBZ2.

  12. #12
    Parker
    Guest

    Parker: Re: TKO and UBZ II

    > Don't we all. The wrath of Don can stay with us for a
    > long time. Just kidding, Don...just kidding.

    It is not his "wrath" that worries me. It is just that, when Don and I reach differing conclusions, guess which one of us is usually wrong? :-)

    > For me, I think it's really gonna depend on how well I
    > can use a level 2 system. I am practicing UBZ II tags
    > now, but I am S L O W.

    > When you switched from KO to UBZ II did you experience
    > the same problem or is it just me? Man, it is much
    > more difficult counting multi-levels, especially when
    > trying to cancel out pairs. When I have, say a 2 and a
    > 5 my brain still wants to count it as 2 and I have to
    > stop and regroup and that slows me down. I can't be
    > doing that at the tables, for sure. Should I try to
    > memorize pair cancellations or just keep doing it
    > until the brain gets a grasp of it?

    I had a great deal of trouble getting accustomed to level 2 tags. While I quickly mastered counting down decks, the slightest distraction in a casino would cause me to lose the count. It took several months of practice before I was able to overcome this.

    Even today, after using UBZ2 for several years, I still become mentally fatigued more quickly than I did when I was using KO. Of course, advancing age may have something to do with that. :-)

    Learning and using counting systems requires a certain type of aptitude that has nothing to do with intelligence or math ability. Some people take to it like a duck to water, others (like me) have to work at it.

    Some individuals learn and switch counts effortlessly, even going so far as to use one system for single deck and/or double deck games, and an entirely different system for shoes.

    I hate those people. :-)

  13. #13
    A10Ploppy
    Guest

    A10Ploppy: Re: TKO and UBZ II

    It was a long day, I'm one of those obsessive types, once I get something in my head I have a hard time letting it go until I've got it figured out (according to my wife this is not a good thing).

    My primary reason for wanting to true count is for shuffle tracking. I did find some threads over on the GC boards that discuss this so I'm thinking it may not really be as critical as I was initially thinking but I really haven't done my homework on that yet.

    I completely agree with keeping it all simple, the system is really great as it is and I'm definately not out to reinvent the wheel especially among all the veterans here. My energy would probably be better spent finding additional methods of maximizing ev and becoming more efficient.

    Thanks again for all the great advice, it's truly appreciated.

Page 1 of 2 12 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.