This is ridiculous. I figured posting a few graphs would get it through your thick skull, apparently you can't even comprehend pictures. All you have to do is look at them and use some common sense. I'm not going to waste my time anymore with this, unless you can substantiate your claims (which I suspect you will not do, because you're making false claims).
"Everyone wants to be rich, but nobody wants to work for it." -Ryan Howard [The Office]
I see 2 graphs that are closely correlated and another that looks closely correlated but on closer inspection has one not changing the bet while another bounces up and down and then the other doesn't change it bet while the first bounces up and down. If I watched as most of these graphs played out I would say that there was little correlation to the way they bet except when they bet minimum for most of the graphs. Maybe you say one betting 6X original bet while the other bets 2x the original bet as correlating but I don't see it that way. When I see general betting that looks somewhat correlated but the bet moves like they both raise or lower their bet as uncorrelated I don't see correlation. It is as I expected. Sometimes more 2,3 and 6 are removed and Hilo bets into no advantage while Hiopt2 bets minimum. Sometimes there are more 4 and 5 removed from the low card group and Hipot2 bets aggressively while Hilo doesn't. More rarely low cards are removed uniformly by rank and they bet about the same. Your sampling is very small but it reflects what I suspected. That is when things get out of whack enough for you either count to predict an advantage the deck is whacky and most of the time low ranks are not removed uniformly. This causes the two counts to bet quite differently. The graphs show that most of the time this is true but more rarely low cards in a whacky deck have been and continue to be removed uniformly causing the counts to bet similarly. I don't suppose you bothered to count the number of times the bet either differed entirely or differed quite a bit or moved in differently from one round to the next and compared that to the whole of when one count or the other identified advantage. That is what the correlation percentages represent. It isn't an eyeball but an actual mathematical representation of the counts' correlation. Look at the correlation percentages and you will see your eyeballs are deceiving you.Originally Posted by RollingStoned
Last edited by Three; 12-30-2016 at 08:14 AM.
Tthree's skull is anything but "thick" and he is way beyond common sense.
It is unfortunate that he has a secret approach that he will only allude to;
as it leads readers to conclude that he is lying or delusional. He is neither.
The sad thing is that your ego is such that you imagine that the breadth and
depth of your knowledge exceeds his. What is more absurd is that you maintain
your criticism, (expressed most harshly), when his position, (the same as mine,
and that of other experts) is contrary to you're own; namely that the performance
of Hi-Lo can approach that of Hi-Opt II (with normal table conditions and bet spread)
I cannot read 16 pages of ‘gibberish’…but my comments are:
Shoe games:
Hilo WILL get you ALL the money...nothing more is needed
PEN is the most important factor to your success
Rules of game are of 2nd importance
HEAT…(99.9% perceived, of course) has (virtually) NO IMPACT on a any PRO’s decision making…just play
Playing for “longevity”:
In short, at your ‘local store’….there is no such thing as playing for longevity if you know what you are doing and not wasting your time ($takes)
If you think you are betting or acting (hits/stands) to make you ‘welcome’ in the LONG RUN….YOU HAVE NO CLUE and are NOT winning anything $ubstantial…period
Even if you play unrated at ‘local stores’…they will still identify you in their system…they will know that “big, dopey barefooted fishermen w/ 3 inch calluses” won X$$$....lol
once cumulative X$$$ > win tolerance…you will be booted…regardless of the system you employ
‘session win’ has little to do with getting booted…it’s cumulative $$ (sans db recognition)…any MORON can win in the SHORT RUN
SPREAD TO THE HILLS (br allowing) and BURN OUT every game you find to your advantage….if you don’t, someone else surely will
Short Run:
Anyone who thinks they can compare counting systems DURING A shoe, or multiple shoes for that matter….in terms of win/loss $$$….SIMPLY PUT, has NO concept in the math of BJ
Anyone thinking they won “more money” while playing with others at the same table using a perceived “inferior counting system” is JUST PLAIN MORONIC!!!! (or very inexperienced)
I have witnessed MANY of ploppy win SEVERAL TENS of THOUSANDS DOLLARS more than me during A SINGLE SHOE while having zero concept of what they are doing….don’t let this en/dis courage what you are doing, ever….stick to YOUR math
GOOD LUCK!
Sharky
These conversations I was speaking of were about BJ counter catchers but the same applies to Spanish21 where the same people made the same comments at different casinos. I tried to tell them even if you don't think complex is worth the effort in BJ it is definitely worth it and pretty much necessary in Sp21. The3y didn't listen. I know a few of these guys are hole-carding now. Like most AP's that can't count cards anymore they find even bigger edges that are harder to detect by the casinos at other games. They weren't making it counting cards so they back counted and spread too much, which is why they got picked off to begin with. The casinos could have made a lot of money off of them if they left them unmolested as counters. The insane swings were eating them up. Now they are the ones that are a threat to the casinos bottom line.
"I tried to tell them even if you don't think complex is worth the effort in BJ it is definitely worth it"
I don't think the audience in this forum want me to ask this anymore but since you bought it up it leaves a question in my head. Could you please explain why you think complex is worth the effort in Blackjack? Is it because the lower standard deviation or N0 of the complex strategies that make the complex strategies worth the effort? From what I learn from card counting in Blackjack is penetration is more important to a counter's win rate vs using a complex strategy. The speed, hands per hour, and the number of decks in play are more important. Computer studies has shown that the highest yielding card counting system only perform 2/10 percent better.
A simpler count make exploiting the game easier. Sometimes I do backcount on shoe games. Using a simpler count make back count easier. I don't want to struggle to get an edge in the game. Besides why would you want to back count a table using a multi-parameter count?
That is true but if I were to move up to a move complex count it might not be Hi-OPT II because after researching other count systems I found that HI-OPT II doesn't significantly out perform other level 2 and level 3 count systems. Notice I said "significantly" it does out perform other count systems but not significantly I just want to make that clear. Just to clarify things I don't use REKO in running count mode. I modify the KO count system by truing it including the indices and betting.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks