Dear members,
Arnold Snyder in Blackbelt in Blackjack came up with indices for his Red 7 count for 6-deck or 8-deck to be used only in the second half of the shoe. Should a player uses these original indices given by Snyder or would CVCData's generated indices that are to be used throughout the entire shoe be a more accurate alternative? Would there be a noticeable difference in results you think? Anyone with experience in unbalanced counts for shoe games care to give feedback? Thank you.
Wino.
IF, and only if, you are looking for a strong, accurate count,
I urge you to move from Level One, Unbalanced Counts, to
a better count. If you are looking to play recreationally, and
are satisfied breaking even, or winning/losing a trivial figure,
then ignore my (unsolicited) advice.
He didn't ask for an opinion about his counting system.
If you have CVData you can sim both cases yourself and find the answer. I use indexes I generated from CVData exclusively. I use UBZ2 and my indexes I generated are noticeably more valuable than the original indexes George C has in his book on unbalanced zen 2.
For unbalanced counts the index values do change depending on depth, so if Snyder said those were specifically for the second half of the shoe, then they may be pretty far off earlier in the shoe. Unless you don't plan on playing the first half of any shoes, I'd say you are best off generating your own indexes with CVData, and those will be averages of the correct indexes at all different depths in the shoe and will be the right value to use if you want a single value that is appropriate at any depth in the shoe.
Why not improve the Level One, Unbalanced Counts by making it stronger and more accurate count? For example, you can add more indices to make the count stronger. You can even side count the aces by making the Red Seven ace neutral.Originally Posted by ZenMaster_Flash
For a 6 or 8 deck game betting is more important than playing strategies. I would use CVDATA to generate risk-adverse indices for the Red Seven count with about 20-22 indices for 8 deck blackjack games and probably about 52 indices for 6 deck games all risk adverse.
Last edited by seriousplayer; 03-02-2016 at 06:28 PM.
I developed and played a true-counted version of Red 7 with ~50 index plays for a few years and did well with it. While it gives you a bit more power than Hi-Lo in some regards, I agree with ZMF that you should move on to something stronger. There has been a Lot of debate on this site as to which count is "best". At the end of the day, it has to be something that you can handle accurately. I'll also add that you shouldn't be intimidated by something that seems very hard/impossible right from the start (and I'm not talking about saying something is "too hard" after only working on it for a week). If you have the discipline, it's worth the work it will take each day to up your chops to something stronger.
Last edited by Fire Walker; 03-03-2016 at 05:30 AM.
Red7 is a good count. I see no reason to use indices only during the latter part of the shoe. A great deal has been made of the fact that unbalanced counts miss opportunities in the early part of a shoe and are less accurate at deep penetration. The thing is, there really aren't all that many opportunities in the early point of the shoe to miss, and we never get to see the end of the shoe anymore. As it happens, unbalanced counts are generally more accurate than HiLo during the sweet part of the shoe where most money is made.
"I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
I respectfully disagree.
"Good", (especially when used to differentiate good from evil), is a very "squishy" term indeed.
In this context, what I wish to know is this: IF, (somehow), Red 7 is "good", then what is "poor" ?
"Good" is how I might describe a dreadful meal that someone has taken the time and trouble to prepare for me.
That is called "Damned with Faint Praise."
Well, a bad count would be (shudder) Speed Count. Red7, with the right indices, beats HiLo and is certainly acceptable for most purposes. I just find the counting of red sevens unpleasant. Doesn't bother some people.
"I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks