See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 52 of 72 FirstFirst ... 242505152535462 ... LastLast
Results 664 to 676 of 936

Thread: Adding AA78mTc side count to High Low

  1. #664
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    All that stuff you are doing is way harder than keeping a level 2 count and won't outperform them. Even if it did outperform a level 2 count, why not just use the much easier level 2 count?

  2. #665


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    Even if it did outperform a level 2 count, why not just use the much easier level 2 count?
    Because it all have to do with personality and not changing one's attitude. Refusing to make change to things.

  3. #666


    0 out of 2 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Sims only show what I call Power. How powerful a system is if played perfectly. But sims do not take into account the other components I spoke about namely, Accuracy, Camoflague plays and side counts used for possible side bets and ease of use. I will not discuss ease of use in much detail to avoid long discussions but will concentrate on the other three.

    And everyone conveniently refuses to discuss Accuracy which is very, very important with large bets and they concentrate only with Power under the assumption that the HO2 with ASC can be kept with as much accuracy when large bets are being made as the KO system. Accuracy is not discussed because it is a losing argument for the HO2 w ASC.

    Accuracy
    Everyone is concentrating on HO2 with ASC but HO2 is a balanced count and so its pivot is a true count of zero. Gronbog's sim assume decks remaining are estimated to the nearest half deck. With the KO system with a pivot at a true count of 4, at its pivot, the true count is exact independent of decks remaining. At a true count of five, just one true count point form the KO's pivot of 4 but five true count points away from HL's pivot of zero (I am using HL here because HO2 is level 2 and has higher SD than level one KO) is five true count points from it's pivot of a true count of zero and so for the same accuracy of decks remaining, KO system true count calculations is five times more accurate than HL. that is, for a true count of 5, if HL is estimating decks remaining to the nearest half deck, then KO equivalent would be estimation decks remaining to the neatest tenth of a deck. And then there is the accuracy of the side counts. A side count of Aces is calculated as Adef = Ap - 4*dp and so is dependent on estimation dp so Adef is also an estimate. Any errors in estimating dp means errors in estimating Adef. 5m6c and AA89mTc side counts do not involve any estimate of dp and are EXACT. So KO system give very accurate true counts around its pivot of a true count of 4 where large bets are made and XmYc side counts are exact.

    I have mentioned Accuracy several times and everyone ignore accuracy and concentrates only on Power as shown through simulations. If simulations show theoretically that one count system is superior to another, if in practical use that superior power count system is less accurate than the other, then this extra theoretical power will not be achieved in practice. Not one user has countered my argument of Accuracy and ignored accuracy because they know they cannot win on the accuracy argument.

    Camouflage
    This has been addressed in previous posts where users admitted that bet spread, which is obvious, is what casinos look at the most. The only plays that casinos look at are mainly insurance and splitting Tens.

    But I have shown that prefect insurance is KO + AA89mTc >= crc(4). So if tc(KO) = 6, for example, and AA89mTc < (-2)*dr then do NOT insure an so casinos, who are probably tracking with the HL or even just looking at your big bet, will see you with a large bet out and not taking insurance! That will probably buy the player some cover. Other strange plays were not mentioned because with HO2 they just do not occurs. The CC for insurance for KO + AA89mTc is 100% whereas CC of HO2 system is only 92.8%. So KO system provides cover play for insurance not possible with HO2.

    Another strange play I brought up was hitting hard 12 v 6 when the count is high and you have a large bet out. You would never be doing this with the HO2 and furthermore you are even violating basic strategy at a high count where you should definitely 5%be standing on hard 12 v 6 and you will look like you really do not know what you are dong.. But with the KO system this play iis possible. With the KO system the CC of S17 game for this play is 99.8% for stand on hard 12 v 6 and the rule is stand on hard 12 v 6 if KO + 1.5*(AA89mTc) >= crc(-1) or hit hard 12 v 6 if AA89mTc <= (2/3)*(-1 - t)*dr where t = tc(KO) so if tc(KO) = 2 then hit hard 12 v 6 if AA89mTc < (-2)*dr and if tc(KO) = 4 then hit if AA89mTc < (-3)*dr. So you can have a big bet out and be hitting hard 12 v 6. This play, not possible with HO2, would also potentially buy player some cover. HO2 with ASC for hard 12 v 6 has a CC of only 91.5% compared to KO with AA89mTc CC of 99.8%. So KO system provides cover play for hitting hard 12 v 6 not possible with HO2.

    Side Bets
    The AA89mTc and 5m7c can come in handy for certain side bets. I have already talked about using KO + AA89mTc for lucky ladies. 5m7c can help with say Blazing 7's bet. So these side counts can come in handy for side bets as a bonus.

    So even if KO system came in slightly below HO2 with ASC for Power the other three advantage that I mentioned above would make this system worth while. And remember its components are a level 1 counts (except for AA89mTc which is technically level 2 but the Aces just cancel two Tens on the table, not difficult) where as HO2 is a complicated level 2 counts where many ranks are counts as +2.

    But I am not going to worry about KO system not being powerful. I will stick by my prediction that KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c will most likely beat HO2 with ASC for the no LS game and will definitely beat HO2 with ASC for the LS game.
    Last edited by bjanalyst; 02-11-2019 at 08:58 PM.

  4. #667
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Hopeless.

  5. #668


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    Hopeless.
    Same thing many say about you and the bullshit you've typed out over the years...

  6. #669


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    This is all pointless. Again, EoRs are back of the envelop estimates of efficacy used only for the purposes of identifying possible avenues of investigation. They were brilliantly conceived. But, stop pretending that they are accurate.
    Please explain a few ponts about EoR. If EoR are so useless, then why has BJA3 bothered to list EoR to 4 or 5 significant figures? I used EoR for all of my calculations and each time I added more changes to the HL system the SCORE improved. That menas EoR must work.

    After Gronbog finishes his sims of my KO system, which I used EoR to calculate, then I would like you to revisit your comments on EoR.

    Also you mentioend blackjack is not linear (which I heard many times before) but I also read that the linear model is sill very good for blackjack and EoR were calcluated using LSL I believe.

    I am assuming that non-linearly would be important only with less than one deck remaining and if more than one deck is remaining, then linearity is sitll an excellent approxiimation.

    Again, I am not sure about this. So if you do not mind, please expound a little on the non-linearity of blackjack and my comment that with more than one deck remaining, the non-linearly of blackjack can be ignored without much error.
    Last edited by bjanalyst; 02-11-2019 at 08:56 PM.

  7. #670


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    Hopeless.
    Hopelss is not a response. Address my issues, espeically Accuracy. You can not address Accuracy so you take the easy way out and just say hopeless.

  8. #671
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bjanalyst View Post
    Hopelss is not a response. Address my issues, espeically Accuracy. You can not address Accuracy so you take the easy way out and just say hopeless.
    I have many times but you don't see it because you are hopeless. Not going to explain the same thing for the fourth time. We know you either don't understand or refuse to listen.

  9. #672


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    I have many times but you don't see it because you are hopeless. Not going to explain the same thing for the fourth time. We know you either don't understand or refuse to listen.
    You have still not addressed the Accuracy issue. Stop dancing around my Accuracy issue. You say you are not going to explain the same thins for the fourth time but you never once addressed accuracy argument even once!

    Go ahead and argue my statement that the KO system at a true count of 4 at its pivot is exact and independent of decks played. You cannot win that argument so you hide under a rock and say you addressed this issue four times before.

    Counter my accuracy argument for using the KO system for true counts near its pivot of a true count of 4 where true count accuracy is vey important and counter my argument that XmYc side counts are EXACT whereas Adef are APPROXIMATE because they depend on estimation of decks played.

  10. #673
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bjanalyst View Post
    Please explain a few ponts about EoR.
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    Again, EoRs are back of the envelop estimates of efficacy used only for the purposes of identifying possible avenues of investigation. They were brilliantly conceived. But, stop pretending that they are accurate.
    Quote Originally Posted by bjanalyst View Post
    After Gronbog finishes his sims of my KO system, which I used EoR to calculated, then I would like you to revisit your comments on EoR.
    Simming would be the first step in an investigation on avenues to pursue so at least it is a start.
    Quote Originally Posted by bjanalyst View Post
    Also you mentioend blackjack is not linear (which I heard many times before) but I also read that the linear model is sill very good for blackjack and EoR were calcluated using LSL I believe.
    EoRs change as cards are removed. That is why BJ is not linear. Try calculating the EoRs of a depleted pack. That investigation will make you realize a lot of things. I know counters that want accuracy when they have an advantage that use the EoRs for an advantage deck composition rather than full deck EoRs.
    Quote Originally Posted by bjanalyst View Post
    I am assuming that non-linearly would be important only with less thatn one deck remaining and if more than one deck is remaining, then lineariyt is sitll an excellent approxiimation.
    The only thing linear in BJ is insurance. Why do you think the casinos add more decks and cut off more cards? It isn't because they want to keep the game linear. The fact is there is betting accuracy, playing accuracy, variance and bet size when all these things are factored in that all interact to determine how effective you count is. Have you calculated how all 4 of these things will interact when you decide you have something that will perform well. You are still at the starting point of investigation. That is using the EoRs to define a count system. Then you investigate it using sims to see how well it performs. Then you make the judgement call as to whether or not improvements are worth the added difficulty. Every count is much simpler than what you are proposing so your count needs to blow them all away to get anyone to judge it as worth it.

  11. #674


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bjanalyst View Post
    So KO system give very accurate true counts around its pivot of a true count of 4 where large bets are made and XmYc side counts are exact.
    It goes both ways! As you already mention Hi-OPT II is a balanced count so its pivot is a true count of zero. In the same sense the Hi-OPT II system give very accurate true counts around its pivot of a true count of 0 where it give information on when to increase your bet after true count 0. Having a bigger pivot doesn't matter the count system more accurate. With Hi-OPT II at pivot 0 the true is independent of decks remaining.

    Quote Originally Posted by bjanalyst View Post
    KO system true count calculations is five times more accurate than HL.
    Citations needed. How did you come up with that conclusion?

    Quote Originally Posted by bjanalyst View Post
    that is, for a true count of 5, if HL is estimating decks remaining to the nearest half deck, then KO equivalent would be estimation decks remaining to the neatest tenth of a deck.
    As a general rule of thumb. This is true for Hi-lo and KO. Each positive number of true count equals .51% player advantage. Usually for level 2 counts each positive number of true count equals .3% player advantage. It is not valid for you to claim that KO is more accurate than Hi-OPT II. Just because KO has a .51% player advantage for each positive number of true count doesn't make KO more accurate than Hi-OPT II. It means that you are playing with more risk using KO compare to Hi-OPT II because the estimate of player advantage is different. If the player advantage is estimated to be larger you have more bets out and when the count estimate the player advantage to be lower you have smaller bets out.
    Last edited by seriousplayer; 02-11-2019 at 09:40 PM.

  12. #675


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I answered these questions before and I posted these attachments before but I will attach again for seriousplayer. Attached is my accuracy of true counts for HL vs KO at various true count points. And the closer to the pivot of the count the more accurate the true count. Yes, it is true that at true counts zero you are at the pivot of balanced counts and so the true count is exact. But at true count zero you should not even be playing or having a minimum bet out so who the hell cares about accuracy at a true count of zero. I am interested in true count accuracy at true counts around 4, the pivot of the KO where large bets are made.

    So attached is the KO accuracy and I will also attach Betting Efficiency of KO + (1/2)*(5m7c) versus HO2 with ASC for S17, DAS , no LS and S17, DAS and LS which I also posted before. You will notice AACpTCp = Average Advantage Change per True Count point for the HO2 with ASC for the no LS game is 0.29% and for the LS game is 0.32% as compare to analogous KO + (1/2)*(5m7c) AACpTCp of 0.49% and 0.53% respectively. But AACpTCp is not what I am talking about. I am talking about how ACCURATE the player can determine when KO + (1/2)*(5m7c) true count is at a true count of 4 which give the player approximately a basic strategy advantage of 1.5%. At it pivot of a true count of 4, the KO true count is EXACT and totally independent of decks played or remaining whereas balanced counts are APPROXIMATE and depend on how accurate player estimates decks remaining and then in how accurate player calculates the true count which is tc(HO2) = HO2 / dr.

    I do not like posting exhibits that I previously posted but I will repost for your benefit to answer your question.

  13. #676


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    You posted the "Accuracy of Hi-lo vs KO at various true counts." What about "Accuracy of Hi-OPT II vs KO at various true counts." That is what I am looking for. So you didn't post the information. If you did where is it??? Posting the betting efficiency chart for Hi-OPT II is not enough.

Page 52 of 72 FirstFirst ... 242505152535462 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. High Edge Side Bets
    By knoxstrong in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 08-26-2021, 07:44 AM
  2. Adding AA78mTc to High Low
    By bjanalyst in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-27-2021, 05:21 AM
  3. Betting side bet lucky ladies on High Counts?
    By Tenlavuu in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-01-2018, 05:24 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.