But he only wrote "one deck left", which does happen. He didn't say anything that requires dealing "to the last card".Originally Posted by seriousplayer
You mention 1 deck left unless you are playing through that 1 deck it doesn't matter. If 1 deck has been reached and the dealer shuffles the shoe than your idea of RC is your TC doesn't matter unless you are playing through that 1 deck. Understand?
My next challenge for your is see if using whole set of indices for every depth based on Hi-lo for illustrious 18 and Fab 4 is comparable in SCORE to using whole set of indices for every depth based original True Counted KO indices.
If you are rounding, then anywhere from 4.5 to 5 decks and slightly beyond is considered 1 deck left.
Your earlier contention, if I remember correctly, was to use different indices per running count at different depths and I didn’t find that to be all that efficient. I like my system because it produces Hi-Lo true counts and I still get to use the familiar KO running count that I originally learned.
Last edited by RatherNotGiveMyRealName; 09-15-2019 at 11:34 PM.
TKO and Hi-lo indices are NOT exactly the same. You got to stop giving false information to other novices in this form. I just looked at the REKO-T indices in CV Blackjack and Modern Blackjack and compare it to the full and complete Hi-lo, they are not the same. I don't know where you get the information that they are the same. I am challenging this conversation that you are saying the true counted KO indices. I don't care that you like your system but you can't say that true counted KO are the same as Hi-lo indices when they are not. Stop lying to yourself.
There was a discussion long time ago regarding counting KO but using all Hi-lo indices. The true counted KO indices came up on time, even with all the positive and negative Hi-lo indices. REKO true uses less indices compare to the Hi-lo complete.
(Insurance is at 3 for Hi-Lo and -1 for TKO)
Wrong! REKO-True say to take insurance at +4 not -1, using IRC as 0.
Last edited by seriousplayer; 09-15-2019 at 06:18 PM.
A question about the idea of changing appearance: If you are noticed changing appearance, isn't that a giant red flag that you don't want to be noticed, which for surveillance is cause to watch you closely? Why would anyone change appearance if you are not a counter?
You seem to have a really big chip on your shoulder but I’m going to try and take you seriously (pardon the pun). I wrote my most recent post hastily and made an error in the wording that I will amend after writing this.
The result of the equation for TKO and Hi-Lo produces the same information with one equation and different information with another, so it’s important to define our terms. I’m not aware of any misinformation I have on this thread and if I find any, I will amend as necessary. I’m not the most knowledgeable so it’s likely I will say something stupid from time to time.
Moving past the technicals, I implore you to treat people with kindness in the future rather than act completely brash in nearly everything you write. It discredits you and annoys others. Have a splendid evening.
Last edited by RatherNotGiveMyRealName; 09-15-2019 at 11:39 PM.
It depends on the casino you go to. I would personally dissuade anyone from using camouflage but if the place you count at isn’t very AP-friendly, you may need to change your appearance once in a while. My opinion may stem from my experiences at the casino I count at (pit bosses are friendly, some of the dealers are sympathetic to counters). I feel if I were to change my appearance, it’s just silly and disrespectful.
Yes, because you are giving incorrect information. I am not going to be nice to someone who give incorrect information. You think they are know it all and on the right track but you are not. You have a "complacent" attitude and someone is going to take advantage it one day.
Sorry to destroy your positive conception but you are wrong again. The TKO indices for 12 vs 3 is not 6. According to Modern Blackjack Second Edition Volume 2 the risk averse index would be +2 for 12 vs 3 at IRC = 0, which in this case the same as Hi-lo. If you think you are right why don't you take my challenge?
Firstly, what you are referring to is TC = RC/ Decks unplayed - 4 which is simplification of "Brett Harris Formula for KO".
Last edited by seriousplayer; 09-15-2019 at 09:39 PM.
Hi. Couple things.
Number 1 (and I do mean this): The people you interact with in your life will treat you better if you treat them better. I have been nothing but lenient and honest with you, barring my last post, and I will continue to treat you that way regardless of the way you treat me.
Number 2: We need to define our terms. If your TKO equation offsets for the extra 7’s counted by Hi-Lo, somewhat like my system does but without the division, then the indices are the same. If you take the KO running count and simply true count it by dividing by the number of decks remaining, there needs to be an adjustment made to account for the sevens that artificially raise the count.
I’m not an expert at this but I’m learning quickly. I admit that I can be wrong and I would prescribe the same humility to you.
Last edited by RatherNotGiveMyRealName; 09-15-2019 at 11:14 PM.
Agree with seriousplayer.
RatherNotGiveMyRealName...he is annoyed with you because he does not like when newbie players such as yourself come on to the forum acting like an expert in BJ...when you clearly are not.
I appreciate guys like seriousplayer who take the game seriously and don't let numbnuts like you arrive here pretending to know what you are talking about.
And hey, if your feelings get hurt...then you are in the wrong place posting here. Stop asking him to be nice...he is being nice...showing your ineptitude.
I would caution you to advocate “taking the game seriously” and then calling random people you haven’t met “numbnuts.” Nothing else has reminded me of 6th grade more than this post.
I don’t claim to be an expert, but I have done research on this topic and am happy to share my limited knowledge. Note that my first post on this thread was a question about this system.
Generally, the person that has their feelings hurt is the person attacking the other for no good reason. Believe me, if I had feelings, they’d be hurt.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks