How much percentage do you gain?

[Tarzan]

Attachment 1373Attachment 1373

Well, njrich, looks like you got your wish.

Gman, you and I both made reference to the chimpanzee comment. But I think you are taking offense were none was intended. Tarzan did not say and I'll let him speak for himself, but I didn't take it that he was implying that those of us that choose to play a simpiler count, were no smarter than chimpanzees. I took it to mean that the count was so simplistic that it could be taught to a chimpanzee. And, by my thinking that simplicity is the very strength of such a count. It allows you to incorporate other things into your game and plan of attack. Things that really can make a significant difference.

Oh hells bells the chimp statement was not meant as anything derogatory. It was meant to clarify that there is way beyond just doing a basic count if you feel like doing it. More to do with laziness rather than ability perhaps but using a basic count serves other purposes, such as AP tactics that can't be performed if you are totally consumed with your count. Team play requires a simple count to avoid mistakes and the communication errors that could cause mistakes ( am no expert when it comes to team play and have only talked to a few people that have been involved with team play). Playing Hi-Lo to perfection is an accomplishment but it's not like there isn't such a thing as going way past this point. KJ uses a more basic count over ease of mental fatigue, opening him up to other AP opportunities that would otherwise be too overwhelming to perform in conjunction with a more advanced count, etc. The gain from other specific AP tactics can mean a lot more than what you are doing with the count as he mentioned. My methods consume a whole lot of mental energy and leave little space for much else but I am still always trying to keep my eyes open for any boldly obvious AP tactics... my primary focus is the count though.

I look at things a bit differently using DHME/Gordon style groupings. I can detect things that can't be detected using a basic count. Case in point? Let's say you were to come up with an index for A,5vs3 using Hi-Lo. No matter what index you come up with your playing decision will be wrong some portion of the time and this will be easy for you to see if you take a peek at how I look at this particular hand. It's impossible to achieve anything close to perfect play when you are basing your playing decision on a single number on a single number line.
Attached is how I look at the hand A,5vs3 and how a Hi-Lo player looks at this hand. I think in terms of ratios of card groupings to one another rather than a single number that defines not only TC for betting purposes but each and every playing decision.

[Tarzan]

There it is... my index play for A,5vs3, conveniently condensed down to take up only a few pages. Now can you feel a little empathy for me and understand why I would feel sort of like I was "flying blind" if I were to try and use a basic count?

[Tarzan]

Team Play doesn`t exclusively relate to Spotter/BP concept. Many team play outings are nothing but Every Man for Himself on a joint bankroll. Team players will still stick to their counting system. They will play carefully in marginal situations and won`t use a 1:50 spread.


Fine, you`ll get to that 70% PE. This is 20% more than Hi-Lo and since strategy variations count for about 20% of EV, you actually improve your EV by 4%. So, for every hour you play, I will play 2 minutes 24 seconds longer and get the same EV. Unless I already play faster than you with my simpler count... In fact, I should probably stop at 55 minutes into the hour ;-)

You see there? You have it all covered, have all the answers to all the questions and there is nothing further that you need to know or explore. You see the needlessness of anything beyond what you do right now and have the situation well under control. You also might want to up that figure you have out there for PE for what I do...

[ZenKinG]

tarzan what you do is amazing, but I really would question the FREQUENCY of all these hand match-ups in a shoe game long term and if it's even worth the time wasted counting like a computer. On the other hand, pitch game totally different story, and i HIGHLY encourage what you do, but im still weary about it for a shoe game. For me, halves gets the money, and im more then fine with it, doign what you do limits other oportunities as KJ has mentioned such as counting multiple tables and cutting you N0 in half.

[seriousplayer]

Post number one and you slap that out there! Reading through some of the 485 pages scattered throughout the internet on this topic will help you out, sort of, maybe but then again you may be just as confused on the matter as before you started reading about it all. You can also look at the comparisons in lots of blackjack books, Norm has one he can sell you going into it all and he lays it all out nicely in there. There is a difference, a big difference if you think in terms of "blackjack player geological time". This means that if you are playing a whopping 20 or 30 hours of blackjack in a year it just doesn't make a whole lot of difference what count you use or if you count at all for that matter but if you play around 1500 hours a year in actual time at the tables and do another 1500 hours a year in travel, training, etc. then a few percentage points can mean a whole lot!

Something to keep in mind is that any system that uses a single number moving up and down a single number line is going to fall short of the mark no matter what you do. Even if your count is absolute precision and you follow indices to the letter, you will make the wrong decision a juicy chunk of the time because there just isn't enough information to make all that accurate of a decision. I'm the wrong person to comment on this because I view Hi-Lo as inferior and all but useless. There are some people out there that swear by it, are apparently making money off it and any shortcomings of this type of level 1 count are covered by the "getting the most of it" mantra. Hi-Lo is a great count because virtually anyone can do it. It's just not all that difficult... I could probably teach it to a chimpanzee. There is a trade off for this simplicity but it only matters in the very long haul with some larger numbers. There are playing conditions under which Hi-Lo (or anything similar to it) doesn't pan out so well so you would have to adjust your play to accommodate using this style of count. In other words a play all wong out scenario is not as appealing and the ability to wong in would be a big help.

In other words if you are a red chipping kind of guy that plays a few hours here and there it just doesn't matter all that much and going to the trouble to bother with anything more advanced is a waste of time and one counting method is going to fare nearly as well as any other. My advice for anyone using Hi-Lo would be to Wong in and out, stay away from negative or even neutral counts (where Hi-Lo performs horribly as Tthree mentioned). Even if I think you are on a wing and a prayer, there are those that will assure you that you will do well using even the simplest of counts and that Hi-Lo is wonderful and you can be profitable with it.

I could go into why wonging in "ain't what it used to be".... things are a little different and the game has evolved. I used to enjoy a wonging in game in AC years ago before they implemented the 8D, H17, NMSE and everything else they did. I found myself playing about 1/4 of the time and standing around like a gargoyle the other 75% of the time but it was working nicely and it was something you could be profitable on using any ol' count I would imagine. It took a lot of patience is all. NMSE tables changed that drastically and the days of cherry-picking were over for one casino in particular where table hopping was easy, it was crowded and easy to get away with standing behind a table observing. Here's the thing... the game has changed and evolved since the 70's and 80's but the counting methods haven't changed at all. One is very much like another and they are all close cousins of each other. It seems to me that every standard issue count out there is nothing more than a beefed up or watered down version of every other count out there. I wouldn't feel comfortable putting my money at risk using a level 1 count (because a few percentage points mean a lot to me) but there are people out there that will attest to being quite happy and profitable with it. I know the weaknesses and inaccuracies of Hi-Lo and it wouldn't work out at all for the sort of games I am playing these days even if it was peachy keen back in 1986.

For Tarzan,

I know that you are not a fan of the Hi-lo count or any level one counts and it occurs that you are a Hi-OPT II player from previous posts I've read. I am guessing that other than Hi-OPT II you won't recommend any other count system. Or my question to you other than Hi-Opt II would you suggest any other count that is level 2 or above like ZEN, UBZII, Wong Halves, and Mentor count? Are you only biased toward the Hi-OPT II count? See I am not a user of the Hi-lo count but I do believe that other than Hi-Opt II there are other counts that are very useful. From what I read from other post it don't seem that you perceive other count systems to be very useful even if they are level 2 counts or above. That is what I look at as disagreeable and unpleasant with people bias towards only one count (Hi-opt II).

[Pacman]

I believe Tarzan uses his OWN count. Not hi opt II

~Pac

[yesiamred]

I'm not just trying to "keep the ball rolling" here as I too get tired of the count controversies but I believe there are very extensive index tables for Hi Lo that make for viable play at minus counts. No?

Yes, there are extensive negative index numbers for hi-lo and I've done quite well using them too. Whatever works to beat the game and leave with money/chips in your pocket.

[njrich]

I do believe that other than Hi-Opt II there are other counts that are very useful.

Sure there are.

Whatever works to beat the game and leave with money/chips in your pocket.

Exactly

I usually don't get involved in these threads because both sides have valid points. They are very informative for beginners and new members.
Until they inevitably go south and someone takes something the wrong way and then they get personal.
At that point all think about is the other side laughing at us.

IMO the count you use or decide on is secondary. Everyone of them will get the money if played the right way.
Learning what games to play ,money management ,your act are some of the first things you need to perfect. All the other factors involved in playing this game will make or break you not the count you use. Without getting to deep or philosophical I think the count chooses you. It needs to fit your style of play and comfort level.

Personally I can't grasp an unbalanced count not even REKO they just don't work for me.
Does that make me any smarter or dumber than anyone else? I don't think so.



What count you use has nothing to do with your level of intelligence.

[Tarzan]

The theme of this thread was the range of difference of effectiveness between the simplest of counts and the most advanced or complex of counts. I figured comparing Tarzan to Hi-Lo could point out that there can be a significant gain in PE between them. A,5vs3 seemed like a beauty for a comparison since it's virtually impossible to come up with a very accurate index for this hand without specific information about deck composition beyond what any Hi-Lo TC by itself can tell you. There are clear and apparent differences of effectiveness of counting methods and what conditions they perform effectively under. To me this amounts to huge differences but are in themselves only a small part of the big picture. I am a full time player that always has to be looking at every nook and cranny with failure not being an option, not a weekend warrior so I always have to be fast on my feet and very aware of that big picture... I take nothing for granted and always think in terms of being the most efficient AP I can. I take this game rather seriously because I have to! I like the meaner more difficult count because I feel safer with it and know exactly how it's performed over many years but I felt what I do to be a good example for comparison's sake. I didn't mean to "rile up the townsfolk" or anything. How many words am I up to now, like... 10,000 or more words on maybe I don't advocate Hi-Lo?

Anyway, with this A,5vs3 the index is impossible to determine accurately because the {T} density alone is not enough to go on. That being said, YesIAmRed, our fair and noble holder of the many indices for Hi-Lo, How many Hi-Lo players have a plan for when they encounter an A,6vs2? What is the Hi-Lo index for this and how would you employ it? Any risk averse strategies? This is another hand with the same issues... an accuracy issue that it ends up being a coin flip if you are actually meeting or exceeding any specified index for this hand, showing a cap on PE that cannot be surpassed with this sort of count.

[KJ]

I really didn't want to continue with this or any 'count' discussions. I've pretty much settled on a 'to each his own' attitude. And that's the way it should be. There's more than enough, WAY more than enough info and software out there for people to determine what is best for them, based in their abilities and games available to them. And, as I have said before, your abilities, Tarzan, are unique and way high on that measuring stick. It would be a waste for you not to take advantage of them, so this isn't about you. But the OP probably isn't a 'Tarzan'.

But, when I hear you or anyone talking about more complex counts and/or side counts identifying more situation to play A5 vs 3 more efficiently, or any particular hand, I just feel like throwing up! Small potatoes sir!! I am not going to say 'meaningless' because that is for each person to decide, but I will say yet again, this thinking "is chasing pennies when you should be thinking in terms of chasing dollar".

Today's games and conditions are all about getting the money out in max bet situations. For me that max bet situation is 2%+ advantage. Now, I am on the road and can't run sims, so I am just going to do some 'supposing' here.

Let, take a standard, all too common, 6 deck game, 75% pen. I plug in my bet spread and ramp for hi-lo and get a certain win rate, closely related to the max bet (2%+) opportunities. Let's say it's 7 max bet opportunities per 100 rounds. Now, someone else plugs in a level 2 count, which will identify 7.7 max bet opportunities/100 rounds. Maybe 'halves' that Zenking is so fond of, identifies 7.9/100. Increases, yes, but again, small potatoes. Now maybe Tarzan count identifies even more, 8.5/100. Ok , 20% gain. Insignificant? Maybe...maybe not. That's your call. But I will tell you. I am looking for a much bigger gain. Maybe 12 or 14 max bet opportunities/100 rounds, or even more! Now this is significant! And I can achieve these kind of increased numbers using a simple count along with 'other' techniques. Other techniques that may not be available or don't work as well with more complex counts.

As I have said before, each player has the abilities to change these count frequencies. These are the things that really make a difference. It's really about thinking outside the box. And the bottom line, what I can accomplish using my simple count, maximizing max bet opportunities with other techniques is far and away greater than any gain from a more 'complex' count. Improvement from a stronger count, IMO, is stale, inside-the-box thinking, better suited for days gone by, not today's blackjack games and conditions.

[Tarzan]

The OP probably is not a KJ either and there's no way they will be able to count down two or more tables simultaneously any day soon, KJ. I wasn't thinking of the original poster. I wasn't thinking of myself. I wasn't thinking about KJ or Santa Claus or Obi Wan Kenobi or any individual. I was laying out the concept that there is a wide range of advantage (or disadvantage) dependent upon what you are doing out there, using a few bits of factual data to help show this concept with exact numbers on a specific situation.

Holy crap ease up, grow a thicker skin and don't take my disdain of a simple count as some sort of personal attack on you out there the individual. I can be sitting there with Flash the HiOpt2 expert and say, "Gee your count sucks!" and he is going to laugh. He doesn't take it personally and is perhaps amused that I might be one of the few people on the planet that can actually say this to him.

[22 Dreams]

On behalf of chimpanzees...
http://www.therichest.com/animals/th...-in-the-world/

[Three]

This thread is pretty ridiculous. Every counting system has its weaknesses but for some reason some HILO players live in denial that HILO big weakness is lack of PE at negative and neutral counts. This has been well proven many times. HILO has its strengths but PE at negative and neutral counts is definitely not one of them. To argue otherwise either shows willful denial or a pitiful ignorance of well established facts about the game that have been known for decades. If you are getting lots of increase from the main strength of HILO, its chimp like simplicity, this weakness is small potatoes. If you are a backcounter this weakness is moot. If you play all or play lots of negative and neutral counts without the gains from applying the simplicity to ST, counting multiple tables or team play etc then you are feeling the pain from this weakness. You would do well to adjust your playing strategy to fit HILO's strengths and downplay the importance of its weaknesses or find a new count that fits your playing style better. It takes a little practice to develop the basic skillz needed to upgrade your count and it takes discipline to change your style to fit HILO or a huge increase in skillz to use it for ST or multiple table counting.

Some of the efforts to defend or deny this weakness has just shown some of the posters to be uninformed players or in denial. This can be a very very costly mistake for an AP.