Narrowing the "Which Count?" Debate

**moo321** · 07-09-2015, 12:24 PM

Yes, the last thread dissolved into a poo-storm. However, I believe this question is just too important to continue to leave hanging in the air. Specifically, I want to think in terms of guidance to new players. I am including the following 4 possible parameters. Please do not argue about these parameters, because that is not relevant to the discussion, nor is it helpful to the thread.

-Possible Parameters: level 1, level 2, true counting, ace side-counting

Counts:

1. Level 1, no true counting: KO/REKO, Red 7
2. Level 1, true counted: Hi Lo
3. Level 1, true counted, ace side-count: Hi Opt I
3. Level 2, true counted, for betting correlation: RPC/FELT
4. Level 2 "hybrid" count for betting and playing correlation: Zen/Unbalanced Zen
5. Level 2, true counted, ace side-count system: Hi Opt II

Please try to have an open mind, and work within the parameters being described. So, I ask two specific questions, and ask ALL discussion to remain on these two points:

1. Given the parameters described, are there any counts that perform better than those listed?
2. Given the parameters described, do any of the counts listed underperform such that they should not be listed?

**DSchles** · 07-09-2015, 01:51 PM

The SCORE chapter should help to answer your questions, but it would appear that you got it right!

Don

**Gramazeka** · 07-09-2015, 01:56 PM

EBJ 2 better RPC.

**Three** · 07-09-2015, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by moo321

1. Given the parameters described, are there any counts that perform better than those listed?

Better?, probably not. So the point is the best counts for each category. I don't know a lot about the performance of unbalanced counts but I think you got it. There are counts that might be worthy of mention but not better counts.

Originally Posted by moo321

2. Given the parameters described, do any of the counts listed underperform such that they should not be listed?

No

**Gramazeka** · 07-09-2015, 02:17 PM

1.
EBJ 2 BC= 0.9869
RPC BC= 0.9837

https://www.blackjackinfo.com/card-c...cy-calculator/

2.
EBJ 2 indeces = Hi Lo

Don, I right? Or not? )))

**Gramazeka** · 07-09-2015, 02:47 PM

Big PE is good only for single deck, and little for DD. For shoes game PE is "dead" parameter.

**Three** · 07-09-2015, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by Gramazeka

PE is good only for single deck, and little for DD. For shoes game PE is "dead" parameter.

That is funny. It might be a minor parameter but dead? no. Your first job is to get the big bets out at the right time. Your second job is to win as much as you can from those bets. If you are spreading big and betting poorly that is very bad. If you are playing poorly that is also bad. You shouldn't sacrifice BC for PE in shoes but the nice thing is you don't have to.

**Gramazeka** · 07-09-2015, 02:59 PM

Ok, a little history for you))-

http://blackjackforumonline.com/content/hilolite.htm

**Three** · 07-09-2015, 03:26 PM

Thanks for the link. I will point out the issues I have with this when you use it to call PE a dead issue.
1) All the approaches have the same PE and just different index accuracy levels.
2) I am not sure if he set up his sim to do TC estimates the way the indices were designed to or not.
3) It was for SD and used a 1:4 spread. This is fine for SD but when you play shoe games you are spreading far more. PE is determined flat betting but gains from PE (or a different number of or value of indices) depend on how it interacts with your bet ramp. Having indices of plus or minus 1 and 5 with a 1 to 4 spread is one thing multiply missed or misplayed index play by a factor of 5 with a 1 to 20 spread and things would look a bit different.

There is no doubt more but that is enough. Now maybe these things won't make much difference but there is still no getting around issue number 1, these approaches all have the exact same PE. So it says nothing about PE.

**DSchles** · 07-09-2015, 05:24 PM

You cannot compare the "value" of systems uniquely by noting their BC and PE. And while we're at it, don't forget IC. That's why I created SCORE and did the study in BJA3. A system that outperforms another for SD may very well underperform for multi-deck, and vice-versa. A system that outperforms another at multi-deck, but with a play-all 1-16 spread may not outperfrom if back-counting with, say, just a 1-3 or 1-4 spread. Finally, as you all know, certain systems, with strong PEs for SD, REQUIRE that you use side counts and/or lots of indices to acquire that power.

Bottom line: pick the game you play most of the time. Then, using your personal set of indices, spread, and style of play, do the exact same sim for whatever counts you want to compare. That's the only approach that makes any sense. And, you won't always come up with the "better" one simply by looking at BC, PE, and IC. Trust me: been there, done that.

Don

**Gramazeka** · 07-09-2015, 05:35 PM

You right, Don. I have for you one question-
Shoes game- RPC vs EBJ 2.

**Gramazeka** · 07-09-2015, 06:17 PM

Where you, Don? You sleep? Forum wait you... ( joke ). I not see post by Zenfighter ( RPC vs EBJ 2 ) in Bjmath.com. Website no work ((

**DSchles** · 07-09-2015, 07:11 PM

"Where you, Don? You sleep?"

No, not for many hours more!

"Forum wait you... ( joke )."

Sorry. Maybe another time.

"I not see post by Zenfighter (RPC vs EBJ 2 ) in Bjmath.com. Website no work (("

No, no more. Richard sold it. Not functional anymore. Our loss.

Don