Help me improve, KO

**muckz** · 12-04-2013, 11:23 AM

I am currently using the KO count irc 2 pivot 26, I use true count to determine some playing strategies and betting. Originally taken from someone on blackjackinfo.com. (My strategy attached below)

I understand there are losing streaks and winning streaks but, I have lost 300 of my 1000 unit bankroll in 3 days spreading 1-10 on 6D, H17, DAS, DOA, RSA, LS rules (Sometimes 4d, H17, DAS, DOA, RSA).

Is my counting method that inferior?

Is it worth switching to ubz11 or perhaps even Zen worth it?

Any input appreciated.

Muckz

Edit: For anybody who is interested. Attached a new copy of my TKO strategy that is a summary of what I learned in this thread.

**seriousplayer** · 12-04-2013, 11:54 AM

Originally Posted by muckz

I am currently using the KO count irc 2 pivot 26, I use true count to determine some playing strategies and betting. Originally taken from someone on blackjackinfo.com. (My strategy attached below)

I understand there are losing streaks and winning streaks but, I have lost 300 of my 1000 unit bankroll in 3 days spreading 1-10 on 6D, H17, DAS, DOA, RSA, LS rules (Sometimes 4d, H17, DAS, DOA, RSA).

Is my counting method that inferior?

Is it worth switching to ubz11 or perhaps even Zen worth it?

Any input appreciated.

Muckz

I've looked at the strategy that you attached. There are mistakes in playing strategies. You have to remember that you are playing 6D, H17, DAS, DOA, RSA, LS. Why would you Stand on 16 vs 10, 15 vs 10, and 16, vs 9 in the pivot when surrender is available? If surrender is available you surrender. If it is three or more cards you stand. You are missing index plays in the chart that you use. You forgot the deviation 10 vs A in the pivot. You double in the pivot. In your case the pivot is 26. You also forgot the index play for 8,8 v 10 in the key count. You surrender if it is two cards total. It seems like you are missing the surrender indices for the KO count which is not good. Here are the surrender indices that you missed:

14 vs 10 surrender in pivot point
7,7 vs 10 surrender in pivot point
16 vs 8 surrender in pivot point
15 vs A surrender in pivot point
15 vs 9 surrender in pivot point
14 vs A surrender in pivot point
7,7 vs A surrender in pivot point

For insurance if you are following traditional KO it will be 25 that you take insurance. If you are using Color of blackjack index it will be pivot point.

If you are using Color of blackjack version of KO it is better that you follow the indices in COB because there are different playing indices for each deck played for the deviation 16 vs 10 which improve the decision.

Hope that helps.

**muckz** · 12-04-2013, 12:01 PM

I was using basic strategy for surrender.

**seriousplayer** · 12-04-2013, 12:04 PM

That is big deviation from the KO count for surrender. It will cost you couple of percentage. Why would you deviate from the system and do your own thing?

**max85** · 12-05-2013, 12:02 AM

That spread is much to small unless you are wonging every shoe which I doubt plus that loss is quite normal

**tawny** · 12-05-2013, 12:26 AM

Just to make sure, you are using different IRC or pivot for the 4 deck game right? Pivot should be 16 above IRC for the 4 Deck game not 24 like in 6 deck.

TKO is a very good count for shoe games like that, so your results have nothing to do with the count. It is just variance unless you are making some serious mistakes.

**tawny** · 12-05-2013, 12:30 AM

Serious Player,

Why did you put - 14 vs A surrender in pivot point not including 7,7. What do you mean? Wouldnt you also surrender 7,7. If you have index for 7,7 wouldnt it if anything be lower than another 14 v A?

**seriousplayer** · 12-05-2013, 07:27 AM

Originally Posted by tawny

Serious Player,

Why did you put - 14 vs A surrender in pivot point not including 7,7. What do you mean? Wouldnt you also surrender 7,7. If you have index for 7,7 wouldnt it if anything be lower than another 14 v A?

This is weird I have Casino Verite install in two of my computers when I checked. It has KO-P surrendering 7,7 vs A in one of them and the other has 7,7 vs A not surrendering when it hit the pivot point. I will check with Norm about that. I usually play in the desktop. Thanks for catching that.

**Coyote** · 12-05-2013, 08:02 AM

Thanks for sharing your strategy muckz.
It is much the same as the one I am using for shoe games only I had to adjust my IRC to avoid negative numbers.
My brain just doesn't deal well with them.

Very good responses seriousplayer and tawny.

**muckz** · 12-05-2013, 02:30 PM

Added: More indices and Betting strategy

Is there any more complexity I can add? For example, adding more common index plays from KO-Full. I have Norms "Modern Blackjack" on one of the pages (? I have digital copy) in chapter plus 11 - Truly Unbalanced there is a Real KO table that shows 23 index plays and the appropriate rc for decks remaining. Would it be worth trying to incorporate parts of this table into my indices to have them better correlate with TC?

Is this added complexity to this system worth it compared to just switching to UBZ2?

On a side note, I am not looking to make millions playing blackjack. This is a hobby. I enjoy going to casino's a few times a week and having a fun time while bringing in a modest amount of profit (Perhaps enough to pay for travel, food, and alcohol). I would not care if I net $0 after all expenses, that is a win in my book.

Learning about blackjack and counting is intellectually stimulating. I enjoy reading and learning and this community has to be by far the most involved considering the amount of PROVEN experts that contribute to discussion regularly

Input appreciated,
Muckz

**seriousplayer** · 12-05-2013, 03:31 PM

Originally Posted by muckz

Added: More indices and Betting strategy

Is there any more complexity I can add? For example, adding more common index plays from KO-Full. I have Norms "Modern Blackjack" on one of the pages (? I have digital copy) in chapter plus 11 - Truly Unbalanced there is a Real KO table that shows 23 index plays and the appropriate rc for decks remaining. Would it be worth trying to incorporate parts of this table into my indices to have them better correlate with TC?

Is this added complexity to this system worth it compared to just switching to UBZ2?

On a side note, I am not looking to make millions playing blackjack. This is a hobby. I enjoy going to casino's a few times a week and having a fun time while bringing in a modest amount of profit (Perhaps enough to pay for travel, food, and alcohol). I would not care if I net $0 after all expenses, that is a win in my book.

Learning about blackjack and counting is intellectually stimulating. I enjoy reading and learning and this community has to be by far the most involved considering the amount of PROVEN experts that contribute to discussion regularly

Input appreciated,
Muckz

You left something out and one more mistake. In the Hit if < value section you forgot 12 vs 2. You stand if it is equal to or greater than the pivot else hit. Another mistake in you chart is you have 9 vs 2 in Double if > Value section. Your mistaken is you set it to double in the key count. In the traditional KO index you double on 9 vs 2 in the pivot or greater.

"Is there anymore complexity I could add?"

I think you should master the indices you have first. Don't make you cup so full yet.

Is this added complexity to this system worth it compared to just switching to UBZ2?

There is one thing you have to understand. A level 2 count will outperform a level 1 count if you compare them apple to apples. This is true even if you complete an unbalanced level 2 count with a balanced TC level 1 count. However, there are tweaks you can do to level 1 count to make it perform close to level 2 but those tweak could also be applied to level 2 counts. I could not tell you if it is worth switching to UBZ2. Only you can answer that question. I don't know what your purpose. If I were you I will pick a system and master it and leave it at that for the time being. Instead of doubting about which system is worth it.

**muckz** · 12-05-2013, 05:45 PM

Originally Posted by seriousplayer

You left something out and one more mistake. In the Hit if < value section you forgot 12 vs 2. You stand if it is equal to or greater than the pivot else hit. Another mistake in you chart is you have 9 vs 2 in Double if > Value section. Your mistaken is you set it to double in the key count. In the traditional KO index you double on 9 vs 2 in the pivot or greater.

"Is there anymore complexity I could add?"

I think you should master the indices you have first. Don't make you cup so full yet.

Is this added complexity to this system worth it compared to just switching to UBZ2?

There is one thing you have to understand. A level 2 count will outperform a level 1 count if you compare them apple to apples. This is true even if you complete an unbalanced level 2 count with a balanced TC level 1 count. However, there are tweaks you can do to level 1 count to make it perform close to level 2 but those tweak could also be applied to level 2 counts. I could not tell you if it is worth switching to UBZ2. Only you can answer that question. I don't know what your purpose. If I were you I will pick a system and master it and leave it at that for the time being. Instead of doubting about which system is worth it.

Ah, I made typo the second 16 v 10 should have been 12 v 2. In the KO - Full indices for 6D it shows 9 vs 2 at -4 which is the key count if starting at -20, so since I am using a moving key count from some true count conversions I adjusted the 9v2 entry to be key count. I am also rounding some of the Real KO values if they are close to the moving key point to provide more accuracy.

Sorry, I keep updating the spreadsheet, I was anxious to try a new count but, I will take your advice and learn as much about KO as possible.
Added Modern Blackjack's Real KO chart to the spreadsheet and made indices more accurate(maybe).

Thanks,

Muckz

**seriousplayer** · 12-05-2013, 06:04 PM

Originally Posted by muckz

Ah, I made typo the second 16 v 10 should have been 12 v 2. In the KO - Full indices for 6D it shows 9 vs 2 at -4 which is the key count if starting at -20, so since I am using a moving key count from some true count conversions I adjusted the 9v2 entry to be key count. I am also rounding some of the Real KO values if they are close to the moving key point to provide more accuracy.

Sorry, I keep updating the spreadsheet, I was anxious to try a new count but, I will take your advice and learn as much about KO as possible.
Added Modern Blackjack's Real KO chart to the spreadsheet and made indices more accurate(maybe).

Thanks,

Muckz

I don't know why you keep reinventing the wheel and keep being stubborn. Have you simulated the modification (Not the added Modern Blackjack indices) you did and compare it to the TKO in Color of Blackjack? Your modification might not be superior. Some of your KO-Full indices are not right. How do you know that changing some of the Real KO values close to the moving key point will provide provide more accuracy??? How you simulated it or calculated it??? Well, I will leave it to you now.

I would learn to walk before I run but do as you wish.