Based on the topic of the thread, I would like to hear more about mixing up the games (DD vs 6D) in your repertoire. I have been in search of the perfect equilibrium between DD and 6D games. I also have been exploring what may be a good mix between back counting games and playing through shoes. I place a premium on longevity and I am willing to sacrifice a bit of EV to reduce the heat.
I don't plan on playing pitch games; I thought about trying, but most casinos I go to offer single deck and BJ pays 6:5 heard you can't win that. According to the template on the Verte web site the BC is .98 (highest) and Ease of play 7.5 (also highest) for a novice in a 6 deck game this seems pretty advantages?
Using the CVCX online resource for a 2-deck S17 DAS game 1-6 spread 30 card pen, all the major counting systems return very similar vital stats; e.g., Hi-Lo w/ I18 and Fab 4, Hi-Opt II w/ I18 and Fab 4, Zen w/ I18 and Fab 4 and yes, KO Preferred! All 4 of these counting systems return very similar stats for W/L%, SD and SCORE. The slight edge goes to Hi-Opt II.Originally Posted by PokerProf
Just trying to compare apples and apples and include KO Preferred in the comparison. With full indexes, you have to eliminate KO Preferred because it is only uses a modified I18 and Fab 4 approach. Using full indexes, Hi-Opt II is clearly the best among the other 3 counting systems.
"Using the CVCX online resource for a 2-deck S17 DAS game 1-6 spread 30 card pen, all the major counting systems return very similar vital stats; e.g., Hi-Lo w/ I18 and Fab 4, Hi-Opt II w/ I18 and Fab 4, Zen w/ I18 and Fab 4 and yes, KO Preferred! All 4 of these counting systems return very similar stats for W/L%, SD and SCORE. The slight edge goes to Hi-Opt II."
This result can only happen if there is a constraint or two placed upon Hi-Opt II.
Such as No Side-Counted Aces, and a limited set of Basic Strat' departure indices.
Like staging a race between a Buick and a Ferrari, with the Ferrari limited to the 1st three gears !
I suggest reading BOTH volumes of Modern Blackjack for a more accurate comparison.
Last edited by ZenMaster_Flash; 06-23-2015 at 05:12 PM.
Are you simulating HI-OPTII with or without Ace Side count? For KO full indices in "Knockout Blackjack" are really not full indices. If you want KO to perform the max power in running count mode for double deck games you will need to generate your own full indices using CVDATA. I generated my own KO and REKO full indices the results was impressive in double deck and single deck games when comparing it to HI-LO-full with over 100+ indices.
Answering your questions - I was referring to Hi-Opt II without an Ace side count. I understand that "Knockout Blackjack" does not use full indices (that was the point of my above post). I agree with you that you can generate full indices in KO if you true count KO (i.e., TKO) and that might be superior to the other 2 counting systems (Hi-Lo and Zen), but you would not even get close to the performance of Hi-Opt II with full indices.
I think changing counts should only be considered after giving a year plus run with any of the counts. I believe if you commit to one count (like one wife) then you can indeed make it work As you learn more about how to use it effectively, get better at deck estimation and optimal spreading, you will win.
Thinking about changing counts is like thinking about dumping your wife every time she is not in the mood or the lovemaking was not as good as you had expected.
Correction: Full indices KO and TKO will not get close to the performance of Hi-Opt II with full indices with ace side count. I very very close to the performance of Omega II using KO 100+ running count mode in single deck games. If the KO performance could get close to Omega II it can get close to the performance of Hi-opt II without ace side count in single deck games.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks