Looking for info on DMHE/Gordon method

[Distant]

I can't believe I got a reply from the very genious who invented the count that got me interested. Thank you Tarzan, you have made my day just to see your bold face font post.

My heart sinks deeply. I won't lie that I'm profoundly disappointed to hear the truth but at the same time I must thank you for those recommendations.

I hope you will publish your work when it's done, I'll be among the first customers to buy your book.

In one of your post, you mentioned the equalizer analogy to your visualization method, is it something that has always been that way since you started working on the concurrent counts or at first you still had to work with 4 streams of numbers and calculations in your head and overtime with repetition they turned into that graphic equalizer image?

In another one of your posts, you have 3 columns 2-5, 6-9, 10, then as they increment you would then substract the smallest common number from all 3 to have a column to be at 0. Doesn't it help to reduce the number of columns to only 2 if you would always decrement the other two columns whenever a 10 appears?

The groupings are the same as Gordon/DHME but the actual mechanics of the system differ. Currently there are exactly two people at the beginnings of trying to learn this system. I am trying to teach this to these two people just to see if it can be done as a matter of fact. The question has come up about just how many people are suited to tackle this method and these concerns are well justified. The problem is that there is no half way when learning any counting system at all, whether simplistic or more difficult and it's a fairly long road to mastery of this method.

I've been trying to come up with the best format for laying out the parameters of this system. No matter how well you know something, teaching it to someone else is something else altogether. Go read KJ's post on his frustrations with trying to train his two friends how to play blackjack. He's trying to teach these guys Hi-Lo and they aren't with the program apparently. I doubt this is inability to teach on KJ's part but more to do with their inability to learn and understand. I need to make it into an organized and streamlined format that is easy to understand and even then it's likely that very few people will ever be able to master it. I've been getting feedback from these two people along the way as I have been working on "the document", the official comprehensive guide on how to do this and how it works which I hope to complete this year. Ultimately there will probably be a whopping 7 people worldwide that will actually learn this method so I better keep my day job from the sounds of it!

I recommend learning or sticking with something else at least for now for several reasons as follows:
- Information on DHME is sparse at best and you won't get "the whole enchilada", which you need to be truly effective.
- You need a thorough knowledge of how basic counts work to help you understand elements of Tarzan system anyway.
- There is no and will be no comprehensive guide until sometime well into 2014 at the earliest on this method (with that being questionable also since I am debating as to whether I make the information public or not).

[mofungoo]

Here is the complete set of indices for the Gordon count including multiparameter adjustments:

http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/counting/gordon.htm

[Distant]

Many thanks for the link. But I can only bookmark it for now until such a time when I understand his counting method.

Here is the complete set of indices for the Gordon count including multiparameter adjustments:

http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/counting/gordon.htm

[ZenKinG]

Not many today have the counting chops to keep 4 simultaneous running counts. Most people have trouble keeping one simple side count. Some have the chops to learn it quickly but that is rare today. People just aren't as skilled at counting as they used to be. Too many think more than a main count or a minimal number of indices is too much work like they think the casino will just hand them money and they don't need every advantage they can get.

Ahh the older generation think they know everything and the new generation also thinks they know everything, hmm.. New generation wins on this one. Unless you're playing pitch games like the old days, all these crazy counts, 4 simultaneous counts, gordon count/tarzan count are ineffective and no way worth the effort because we might be talking pennies here. In shoe games, the count frequency to take advantage of all these little side count adjustments just won't happen many times over the long run to have an impact. Old generation thinks it's still the 80s where single and double deck games were the norm with great rules.

Pitch game with some decent pen, different story.

[Three]

Unless you're playing pitch games like the old days, all these crazy counts, 4 simultaneous counts, gordon count/tarzan count are ineffective

Really? The sims say different. Up to 20% increase in profits without even getting to Tarzan Count. I guess you make 5 times the pennies you are talking about with a simple count, 5*20% is 100%.

They don't happen much in the beginning of the shoe when you are making waiting bets but toward the end of the shoe the deck usually gets pretty whacky as anyone that side counts will tell you. If I remember right the end of the shoe is where the money is in most cases. If you side count 1 rank you won't see it come into play as often but DHME side counts 5 ranks (5 times the likelihood of being quite profitable info and Tarzan doesn't even have a main count but works from ratios of equal sized groups. Normal counting ideas do not apply. You bet big if the cards get whacky with the right deck composition, Most of the time the cards have some of the middle ranks whacky at the same time. Generalizations made about side counting one rank don't transfer well to card groups or many individual ranks. I like to make sure when I put those big bets out that I have the best chance to make big money. There is value in knowing the side counted cards are at expectation.

The other thing to think about is if you ever want to attack other games a single parameter count with no side counts invites variance to eat your BR. You can make so much more if you have the counting chops to do multiple counts with side counts. It will likely be the difference between destroying the game and struggling not to loss your entire BR. Most I know that tried to stick to the shoe BJ mantra of keep it simple failed in short order at other games. They mistakenly felt the simple approach would be sufficient because it just looks like BJ. The swings are huge compared to BJ in these games and your EV better be as well.

In shoe games, the count frequency to take advantage of all these little side count adjustments just won't happen many times over the long run to have an impact.

Old generation thinks it's still the 80s where single and double deck games were the norm with great rules

The older generation just wants the highest EV they can get. If they just straight count that means using some extra info. It is like getting a 5%, 10% or even 20% raise but the young pups don't want a raise because they don't want to do more work. We all do the "work" in the same time so I am not really sure it is more work. It is just using your time better.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

Good post by Tthree.

The reader needs to understand that the Tarzan Count does NOT use the

Gordon Count approach, which side-counts individual ranks: 6, 7, 8, and 9.

The (basic) Count keeps ratios between 3 groupings and Side-Counts Aces.

[ZenKinG]

The older generation just wants the highest EV they can get. If they just straight count that means using some extra info. It is like getting a 5%, 10% or even 20% raise but the young pups don't want a raise because they don't want to do more work. We all do the "work" in the same time so I am not really sure it is more work. It is just using your time better.

I dont use a simple count, i use a level 3 that gets the most EV out of any single parameter count, and arguably greater than omega and hi opt II in shoe games, especially for the rules that i play. That's besides the fact. Old generation wants the highest EV they can get so much that they're stuck with their old ways of thinking and haven't noticed that their theories are now obsolete. Games have changed, pitch games aren't the norm anymore and until proven otherwise by some type of sim or calculation, you'll need some scientific proof to sway me.

I know you will bash on the current thinking of everyone just wants to see a sim and therefore are blinded by what's actually in front of them and the fundamentals of the game, but in this case I need some type of proof that in the LONG RUN these 1,000 side counts at the table for an 8 deck shoe game is indeed worth it. Not to mention almost no one can do it error free, and the people who can do it won't have the ability to have good cover while playing because of thinking like a computer and being extremely focused while playing, instead of grabbing a beer, slappin high-fives with the other plops, talking to the pit, more IMPORTANT things. The people who do those thousands of counts at the table all at once are most likely playing slow dealt shoe games with cover or fast dealt shoe games but most likely with no cover, either way you lose, let alone the fact that there's no sim or any proof showing any positive results from doing this in a shoe game. I would love to see anyone do all these counts and play 120-150 hands an hour, while chatting along with everyone at the table and acting like a degenerate.

Ill focus on playing the best games and playing fast dealt games at over 120 hands an hour with Halves, while having a good act. That's where the money is and that's where the longevity is.

[Three]

Not to mention almost no one can do it error free, and the people who can do it won't have the ability to have good cover while playing because of thinking like a computer and being extremely focused while playing, instead of grabbing a beer, slappin high-fives with the other plops, talking to the pit, more IMPORTANT things.

I don't know where you get this idea. If you do anything enough it becomes fast and effortless. If I sat you at a table and told you 2 where using all kinds of advanced counting techniques that few could do you would be surprised by who they are. To have the drive to do these types of things has the same drive for perfection in the other aspects you list.

I would love to see anyone do all these counts and play 120-150 hands an hour, while chatting along with everyone at the table and acting like a degenerate.

This is what they do. I have an insanely hard count and no dealer is too fast for me now. I interact and talk when necessary and it doesn't throw me off. The fact that you think it would shows you never drilled enough and played enough to get efficient and effortless at your count. If you did with a level 3 then you should see how they do as well.

Ill focus on playing the best games and playing fast dealt games at over 120 hands an hour with Halves, while having a good act. That's where the money is and that's where the longevity is.

It's funny you say that because the ones you are being critical of have been doing just what you say above for decades using their approach and are still welcomed back. Don't assume your own limitations are the same for others that are more driven to excel at this game.

[ZenKinG]

It's funny you say that because the ones you are being critical of have been doing just what you say above for decades using their approach and are still welcomed back. Don't assume your own limitations are the same for others that are more driven to excel at this game.

Really? Last time I remember, tarzan is playing marginal games LOL. They claim it's because he has no other access to games and with his super count he can play marginal games and still make more EV than an average player and still stay under the radar and be welcomed back, which in all fairness is just skeptical at best. If i had that ability, i would travel and play the very best games, i mean why wouldn't you? You would still have the same cover and be welcomed back. I thought these players are more willing and driven to excel at the game. They are so driven and willing to excel, that they can't travel? LOL

The people who CAN do these counts with cover and everything great, maybe they're a savant. With such a great skill set, why are they playing a game with such a small edge in blackjack, they should be applying it towards something with a far greater edge, with such a great skill set. Nonetheless, this is all speculative, even if they CAN do all these counts and have cover at the same time and play against a fast dealer, my first point still exists, someone show scientific proof that there will be a long run worthwhile difference in edge to correspond to the amount of effort it takes to learn all of this and also the effort to do it at the table. Not to mention the time to be completely accurate with no mistakes.

Because at the end of the day, the frequency of all these match-ups with surplus or deficit of cards where the sidecounts can be utilized won't be skewed heavily towards one side enough in the long run to garner any significant edge in a SHOE game. When it does skew towards one side, you STILL are not guaranteed to win those hands each and every time there is an imbalance and try to play the hand differently.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

Methinks that ZenKinG misses the point.


Tarzan is perhaps twice your age. He may have a family, etc. rendering responsibilities.

He may have health issues that make travel more difficult than you are imagining.

He may not be "in love" with the "almighty dollar." He does indeed go to Las Vegas

(and some other casino markets), with some regularity. I know because we are roomies.


Sophomoric / naive ideas about being a professional player miss the point that Tarzan

has made a couple of times. Longevity is of paramount importance; and I assure you that after

knowing him for five years, there is no doubt at all that his consistently winning a few units daily in

a short span of time, (betting black), has earned the respect and admiration of myself and other A.P.'s

[AussiePlayer]

Methinks that ZenKinG misses the point.

He does that with remarkable consistency.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

Hee hee hee.

Indeed … "He is all of that, and a bag of chips" !

A "consistent" player sparks a series of associations for me:

Many times I have heard dealers advising ploppies to be "consistent"

in their play. This is always expressed with a pompous air of certainty.

The utter lack of logic always amuses me.

The play may be 100% correct or 100% mistaken,but consistency trumps truth.

[ZenKinG]

Methinks that ZenKinG misses the point.


Tarzan is perhaps twice your age. He may have a family, etc. rendering responsibilities.

He may have health issues that make travel more difficult than you are imagining.

He may not be "in love" with the "almighty dollar." He does indeed go to Las Vegas

(and some other casino markets), with some regularity. I know because we are roomies.


Sophomoric / naive ideas about being a professional player miss the point that Tarzan

has made a couple of times. Longevity is of paramount importance; and I assure you that after

knowing him for five years, there is no doubt at all that his consistently winning a few units daily in

a short span of time, (betting black), has earned the respect and admiration of myself and other A.P.'s

According to tthree, tarzan and other advocates of these super counts, they are more "driven and willing" to excel at the game then me. This should mean some travel, but i guess not.

Short span huh? Tell me when it's about long term span LOL. Anyone can win a few units daily in short span