Tthree, there are a few problems with the comparisons. If you click on display tables in CV Data, you'll see the surrender indices are missing from Complete Zen. For Zen players, the solution is simple--use CV Data to generate accurate Zen indices.Originally Posted by Tthree
The DD comparison is confusing. You have a 1-6 spread for Zen, a 1-12 spread for HiLo, and you're saying 1-20 spread throughout!
Thanks 22 Dreams for catching my colossal screw up. This is the right info (I hope LOL). It doesn't surprise me.
I always find it amusing when we get into the simple or complex argument. You get the keep it simple crowd arguing (perhaps correctly for many individuals) that there will be more errors. Then they talk about the benefit of counting two tables which is nothing to sneeze at. Then you ask about how they pull off counting two tables without being obvious since you must count every card at both tables and back counting one table discretely is not necessarily easy. Their answer is the amusing part. I hear it doesn't matter if you miss some cards. maybe they are right but what that translates to is they are accepting mistakes as a given in their play. In most cases I am sure there is a benefit to doing tis even with the built in errors that must happen when you do it or quick backoffs from being so obvious. I just find accepting they will make errors to get a better advantage and saying you shouldn't seek a better advantage because you may make errors to be an odd logic bias.
What is the count best for you? The one you can do flawlessly that gives you the best advantage. Maybe you are capable of doing more advanced counts but you use some techniques tat make HILO the best count for you. Maybe your errors will come from trying to use HILO for more than straight counting one table and you won't make errors with a more advanced counting system. this question is a very personal question and there is no one size fits all answer. Be honest about your strengths and weaknesses and use a count that best fits you. You can work on improving your skills so the answer to what count is best may evolve with your abilities. You may become great at ST and add that to your skill set and switch to HILO from a higher count. Counting a higher level count with side counts may become the easiest thing in the world for you and the added certainty to knowing whether the deck is whacky or not can have you betting larger with the same RoR.
That brings me to my other point. What exactly are the advantage s of most higher level counts. I heard deck estimation skills mentioned. A level 2 count will spread the same info on a numberline about twice as long as a level 1 count. If you use integer indices that means your indices will be more accurate. A level 1 count could divide by the number of half decks left to stretch the numberline to an equivalent length but then you need finer deck estimation skills. Most don't do this. The level 2 count has a smaller N0 in general so you reach the long run quicker. There is generally more certainty to a level 2 count so the ride is usually less bumpy with swings being a little friendlier. This is caused by tighter bell curves around every statistic. The if you run an optimal 1-20 spread keeping the BR, RoR, rules and pen constant you will bet larger optimally with a level 2 count generally speaking. Many people keep the bets the same when comparing counts. Then some of the gain from the advanced count will be lower RoR and not show up in EV. If you want to reduce the gain to all EV you use an optimal 1-20 spread for both systems. The bets will not be the same unless by coincidence. Wonging style should also be simmed when making the comparison.
Using the canned play-all sims in CVCX (6d, S17, DAS, 1-20 spread, full kelly, 1 deck cut off, $100K BR):
Zen ('80), full indices heads up compared to HILO full indices heads up your optimal spread is $143-$2860
(Average bet $417.13, $744.84/100 rounds, Winrate/SD 5.209/60.445, RoR 13.6%, c-SCORE 74.26, CE $371.29, N0 13465)
While HILO bets at $136-$2720.
(Average bet $394.81, $671.74/100 rounds, Winrate/SD 4.939/60.497, RoR 13.7%, c-SCORE 66.66, CE $333.27, N0 15003)
Notice in this case ZEN optimal bets are more aggressively. Even at this high of a spread Zen handily outperforms HILO at all stats under these rules etc for play-all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
(2d, H17, DAS, 1-6 spread, full kelly, 35 cards cut off, $100K BR):
Zen('80), full indices heads up 1-6 optimal spread is more aggressively $253-$1518
(Average bet $485.25, $565.52/100 rounds, Winrate/SD 2.235/29.688, RoR 13.4%, c-SCORE 56.69, CE $283.43, N0 17644)
HILO full indices heads up 1-6 optimal spread ranges $230-$1380
(Average bet $445.74, $488.52/100 rounds, Winrate/SD 2.124/30.215, RoR 13.2%, c-SCORE 49.41, CE $247.04, N0 20236)
Optimal ramps are still higher for Zen than HILO crushes with Zen still outperforming HILO in these play-all sims.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skipping 1d as the proper playing approach will not be what is simmed in the canned sim.
Of course wonging style etc needs to be factored in but if you want to step up perhaps a different count would be a better choice. I would run my own sims for the games I play and my wonging style and see what is there. In plus counts HILO is much better than in minus counts. So in a wonging sim the difference will most likely be less. But the sims are what they are and you have to run them to see for sure. You might consider HIOPT I for pitch games and HILO for shoe. You could balance the ace side count with the 2 and (2 = +1 ace = -1) for a balanced side count. Add the two counts together and you have HILO to use when that is better but you can use HIOPT I (the main count) for most playing situations where it is much stronger. Then if you want to go level 2, rather than deciding the side count is two much trouble and reverting to HILO, you can go to HIOPT II which is among the strongest if not the strongest count out there.
You must factor your ability to do things accurately into your decision. The only way to get a gauge on this is to try more advanced counting at least in training. The beauty of going HIOPT I is the indices for HILO and HIOPT I are almost exactly the same.
Last edited by Three; 03-08-2015 at 11:47 AM.
I agree with KJ. Often counts that are advanced can give you a lot of insight that it would be difficult to program the computer to follow. It would not be impossible but it is usually easier just to realize this and sim some simple assumptions rather than try to mimic a complicated decision process. My results usually outperform the sims because I am making complex decisions based on the count that the computer doesn't. If you wanted to you could take the time to program a computer to do anything. But it is a lot of trouble to have a complicated decision tree that will simulate how you might make multi-variable decisions like at what point do you wong out depending on dealer the counts used and their likelihood to recover or the cost of waiting for the next shoe if you are near the end of the shoe, game speed, pen, number of players at the table, availability of another table, whether or not you won the last hand etc. I just realize the sim is a conservative estimate of what I will do.
Last edited by Three; 03-09-2015 at 03:47 PM.
If you're going to switch counts to get more complicated, Halves/RAPC is a WAY better count for the mix of games you're playing than Zen.
Really, Halves/RAPC is the top-of-the-line for shoes, and it's nearly as good as the best counts for DD. Hi Opt II doesn't really outperform until you get into really deep pen on DD, or single deck, and even then it's like 3% better than Halves/RAPC.
The Cash Cow.
--------------RAPC-----FELT-----Hi-Lo
BC ----------1.00-------.99------.97
PE------------.53-------.55------.51
IC------------ .71------.78-------.76
Ease of use-- 1 -------- 5------- 6 ------- 1 is the hardest
http://qfit.com/book/ModernBlackjackPage172.htm
Last edited by Bodarc; 03-09-2015 at 01:46 PM.
Play within your bankroll, pick your games with care and learn everything you can about the game. The winning will come. It has to. It's in the cards. -- Bryce Carlson
Instead of RAPC, which is a level 4 and pretty tough, try Revere Point Count. Its a level 2 and not difficult really, BC .99, IC .78. I used it for awhile but then went back to HiLo but am considering going back to RPC. If your good at cancelling pairs its really pretty easy.
I agree with Tthree, among others. I had this same dilemma myself months ago because I used Hi-Lo but still hadn't been playing for that long relatively. I thought about coming to the board, but ultimately just did it and switched to Zen. If you use the 1D TC indices, which are readily available online like Hi-Lo, it's basically the same exact count multiplied by 2, with some exceptions. It took me probably 2 weeks to transition and memorize fuller indexes, and not that much longer to count down decks perfectly and start playing. Counting in a tense atmosphere with the added room for error will make it harder at least at first, but there's no reason to believe you can't do it, and in less time than it took you to get to this point. After that, you have your whole career ahead of you with better score.
If you're spending the time to delve into online bj resources and study up on the game (and log a lot of hours playing), you can handle switching to a more advanced count imo. I'm not going to reproduce specific sims, but I can remember seeing Zen out-preform Hi-Lo in almost every game (with their own ramps/indices), albeit not by a significant margin. The key is trying to memorize as many indices as you can, which in time isn't too much to ask. Then it becomes a question of can you afford NOT to pick up whatever extra PE you can get. Anyway, good luck with whatever you end up doing.
Bram
Is it really just a matter of pennies? Seeing the difference in PE between Zen and Hi-Lo (almost 25%) makes it look tempting especially when you lose so many hands and many of the cards keep their values, but in that thread discussing the PE of REKO I didn't see a clear consensus as to what PE really means in terms of pennies and nickels and dimes.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks