Side counts and Zen

[DatabaseGuy]

(Ignoring ace-neutral counts such as HO1 and HO2).

If only one side count was kept along with a Zen or HiLo count, which would it be?

I would think Aces, but is it always true?

With a deficit, black jacks and DDs are more likely.

With a surfeit, busts are more likely.

Am I missing anything?

But what other side counts would be beneficial for Zen? Or any other particular counts?

[Three]

Sevens.

[Freightman]

Sevens.

Excellent briefly, as to your why?

[cc12b]

Excellent briefly, as to your why?

I understand that 7 counted as 1 in ZEN count already. Side count it again?

[Freightman]

I understand that 7 counted as 1 in ZEN count already. Side count it again?

Actually, my positive response to T3!s post had mostly to do with its simplistic brevity. A shirt concise, Easy to read post.

[Freightman]

A very interesting question. My own philosophies are ever changing on this subject. For myself, I was big for quite a while on 9 side count with halves. Though very effective for its purpose, frequency of occurrence was not sufficient, and I'm not as interested as I used to be.

Best answer I think would be a combination of ability of individual coupled with what one is trying to achieve. Regardless of decision, answer has to be one that does not affect game speed. I am experimenting (superficially for now) with a couple of thoughts. First, the success rate differential between insurance index for insurance vs insurance 10 count. Second, a general letter count of intermediates - it's effect on variance, especially in higher counts, as well as the potential to further fine tune insurance index. I'm muddling as I'm fumbling with approach.

Regardless, I hope others participate, at least relatively briefly, on other thoughts.

[Three]

Nobody asked for a why. I am just sticking to what is asked.

[Freightman]

Nobody asked for a why. I am just sticking to what is asked.

Xcellent progress guess m the wordy one this time.

[Three]

Side counting aces is usually for betting. If the count is not ace neutral then there is not much betting gain. Then you are side counting almost exclusively for insurance. Playing side count gains are proportional to the PE of the inside counted count. That makes hilo a poor choice to make side counting for gains in PE. Zen on the other hand has a reasonable starting PE as an ace compromise count. That makes it better suited for side counting for playing hands. Everyone talks about chasing pennies. If you are going to the effort to side count then choose a count that will make it the most worth it. Obviously ace neutral counts are the kings for PE. But you already side count the aces if you use one of them. Not many will want to side count more than one rank. If you are one that would you add the 7 side count to the ace side count with an ace neutral count. Those that only want to side count one rank find Zen to be a perfect count for side counting 7's.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

"Those that only want to side count one rank find Zen to be a perfect count for side counting 7's."

Note: Side Counting Sevens improves Playing Efficiency. It has no influence on bet-sizing.

I have index adjustments for surplus/deficit Sevens (per quarter deck) for use in "pitch games."

[marriedputter]

Zen on the other hand has a reasonable starting PE as an ace compromise count. That makes it better suited for side counting for playing hands. Everyone talks about chasing pennies. If you are going to the effort to side count then choose a count that will make it the most worth it. Obviously ace neutral counts are the kings for PE. But you already side count the aces if you use one of them. Not many will want to side count more than one rank. If you are one that would you add the 7 side count to the ace side count with an ace neutral count. Those that only want to side count one rank find Zen to be a perfect count for side counting 7's.

Just to add for the OP,

Always side count the ace first before any other card if you insist on side counting something. Getting that BC as high as possible is crucial to your bankroll. If you are going to go to the trouble of learning a level-2 count and side count something, why use Zen? I would (and do) use Hi-Opt II over Zen and Omega II because the tag treats the 6 card more accurately in terms of EOR (and eliminates the need to count the 9 with Omega II). These tags, with the side counted ace, bring the BC up higher than Zen (and within a hair of Omega II). The IC is also increased substantially. The count won't be more difficult than learning Zen or Omega II either because the tags are almost the same. This makes it more preferable in my view.

So in other words, pick the count around the ace side count, not the seven side count. Only after you have done this, then start to include sevens if you feel up to the task.

[Three]

Always side count the ace first before any other card if you insist on side counting something. Getting that BC as high as possible is crucial to your bankroll. If you are going to go to the trouble of learning a level-2 count and side count something, why use Zen? I would (and do) use Hi-Opt II over Zen and Omega II because the tag treats the 6 card more accurately in terms of EOR (and eliminates the need to count the 9 with Omega II). These tags, with the side counted ace, bring the BC up higher than Zen (and within a hair of Omega II). The IC is also increased substantially. The count won't be more difficult than learning Zen or Omega II either because the tags are almost the same. This makes it more preferable in my view.

So in other words, pick the count around the ace side count, not the seven side count. Only after you have done this, then start to include sevens if you feel up to the task.

Yes counting the ace in the main count really cripples everything except BC. Hiopt2 is king and you must side count aces in any ace neutral count in order to make it worth using. Counting anything other than 4 and 5 as +2 tags in a level 2 count hurts your overall results. It is about better defining advantage or sorting situations into bins that have a much smaller range of advantage (This means bets are more accurate which is different than what BC says. BC says how well your count tags correlate to the different card ranks EoR's. Betting accuracy is not indicated by BC but there is a degree of correlation there). And counting the 9 messes up insurance and hurts your most common hit/stand deviations of a hand of 12. This is enough to outweigh any gains from counting the 9. The truth is Hiopt2 is not easy to use and side counting anything needs great deck estimation skills unless you use a balanced side count. That said if and when you get to be able to use Hiopt2/ASC proficiently you will be using the most effective count of the ones readily available.

[seriousplayer]

Hiopt2 is king and you must side count aces in any ace neutral count in order to make it worth using. Counting anything other than 4 and 5 as +2 tags in a level 2 count hurts your overall results.

Uston APC users that side counts Aces would probably disagree. You are right HI-OPT II is the best level 2 card counting system. But it doesn't mean a level 3 card counting system cannot top it.