Someone who plays the game of BJ to the full extent of making $15 wagers so they can make side bets, should be writing books about the side bets, and not on the game itself.
What does Vegemite taste like?
https://youtu.be/7sYw5c4_lLQ
LMAO!
Good point! The reason I think it’s overly complex is because the side count is two levels...he counts the ace as -2 (or +2, I forget). Who has a primary count that is one level and a side count that is two levels? I’m not an expert here (trolls have at it), but even I can see this makes no sense.Originally Posted by therefinery
If there would have been a prop bet on Bosox’s post, I’d be a millionaire right now. When I hit the Post bottom, I predicted (to myself) that Bosox would be the first to reply with about the exact post he made.
Here’s something Bosox (and many others on this site, including Don) don’t understand. You can try to learn something from someone even thought you don’t totally agree with them. I learned from bjanalyst and plan to buy one of his books, even though I don’t totally agree with his system. I picked up some things from his system that will make mine more powerful.
The reason I said Don doesn’t understand this is because of a post he made where he went on a rant and called me names. It was on stocks and casinos. At first, he said he was listening to me but then I said something that sent him off in left field...and after that he more or less said he rejected everything I said. That’s his loss. I’m not always right, as with everybody else in life.
But to throw out everything someone says just because you don’t agree with one thing is only hurting that person. No matter how much I like someone, I usually never agree with everything they say. There’s a lesson to be learned here Bosox. Hope you're listening. It’s called open up your mind and try to understand ideas that are different from yours. You might grow and learn something new.
It would have been nice if before posting criticisms that you reviewed and read the previous posts as I have answered many of your criticism in previous pasts. So user’s complain that I reaped myself. Well I complain that I get the same complaints over and over again that I already answered before. If you stopped asking the same exact question and make the same complaints that I have already answered many times before I would not have to repeat myself.
I had also asked previously that that you give CONSTRUCTIVE criticism with suggestions for improvement or point out SPECIFIC mistakes that I made that you found Instead your entire reason for not liking my system is very nebulous and that you claim it is worthless (without presenting any proof) and that is it too difficult for YOU.
In a previous post I listed eight advantages of the KO with XmYc as opposed to balanced counts with side counts of individual ranks of cards and especially the complicated level 2 HO2 count. If you thought my system was so worthless then you should have dissected and responded to each of my eight reasons and said why each was not true. So why did you not do that? Instead you take the easy way out and make a blanket statement that my system is worthless without any specifics.
It should be noted that not one mistake was found in any of my work. Also each new level of changes that I gave to adding more strategy changes to the HL with AA78mTc and 5m6c (not my recommended count – KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c is my recommended count) improved the SCORE. I gave values of "k" and indices calculated in LSL approach and these values were entered into sim program and the SCORE improve each time - maybe that means that the LSL program produces accurate results then?
And you claim AA89mTc counts five different ranks and so it is very complicated. First it is four different ranks Aces, 8's. 9s, Tens. Also you are not counting each of these ranks individually – you are cancelling out the ranks. So that is a misleading statement - you simply scan he table after all cards are dealt and before players make their decisions with PLENTY of time to calculate AA89mTs (s = seen during the current round) and update AA89mTc from the previous round and then continue to update as players make their decisions.
Also I suggested that if AA89mTc is too complicated for YOU then try just using 5m7c where you as a side count and see how it works unless keeping track of 5m7c is also too difficult for YOU. I posted a chart on KO with 5m7c that simplified the entire system to one page along with formula simplifications.
Also I explained about TEN times why the SCORE was below HO2 with ASC. But apparently you do not understand or did not read previous posts and continue to harp on the lower SCORE. So I have to repeat myself again! I showed that for I18 HL with AA78mTc and 5m6c resoundingly beat the HO2 with ASC wining 14, tied one and losing 3 I explained that HL with AA78mTc and 5m6c lost to the HO2 with ASC because HL unchanged was used for betting and HL has a lower BE as compare to HO2 – 2*(Adef). So HL system won in PE but lost in BE and in the shoe game BE if very, very important.
So stop making me repeat myself over and over and over and read the previous posts before asking questions that were answered in previous posts.
I also showed that KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c does not have the problem with betting as HL with AA78mTc and 5m6c does. I showed that KO + (1/2)*(5m7c) had a higher BC than HO2 – 2*(Adef) and I also showed that KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c beat HO2 with ASC in the majority of playing strategy decisions and some of the beatings were very substantial and much larger than the few times that HO2 with ASC beat the KO system.
So if KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c beats HO2 with ASC in both PE and BE then KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c is a stronger system than HO2 with ASC.
So next time you post a criticism be SPECIFIC and post CONSTRUCIVE criticisms. No nebulous criticism with unfound and unsupported claims and merely your opinion that YOU do not like it or it is too complicated for YOU.
So another users who has trouble adding and multiplying small integers and comparing to a 3rd integer. Much too difficult for them And I also include simplified formulas for separate KO with 5m7c and KO with AA89mTc charts in previous posts.
So let me analyze the complexity that everyone is talking about by taking a specific example.
Consider hit/stand hard 16 v 7 decision. I said when you have a large bet out say tc(KO) = 4 that you stand on hard 16 v 7 if 5m7c > 2*dr. So now you have a few very difficult calculations. First you have to see if KO >= 4*n where n = number of decks which is very difficult. Then you have the overwhelming difficult calculation of multiplying decks remaining by 2 and then seeing if the 5m7c side count is greater than this product. So now you are doing multiplication by two and comparing two numbers. Gadzucks! This is damn complicated. Now I see why you says my system is difficult for YOU.
Good point! The reason I think it’s overly complex is because the side count is two levels...he counts the ace as -2 (or +2, I forget). Who has a primary count that is one level and a side count that is two levels? I’m not an expert here (trolls have at it), but even I can see this makes no sense.
Counting the Ace as +2 in the AA89mTc is really not the same as the HO2 with you have the 4's 5, as + 2 and all Ten's counted as -2 and you then have to count the 2, 3, 6 and 7 as plus one. Lots of ranks to keep track of with around half the ranks being a 2 value and the others being a one value. With AA89mTc there is only one rank, the Ace, that is counted as +2 and the 8's 9's are +1 and Tens -1.
For the AA89mTc you wait to update the AA89mTc after all cards are on the table and before players start playing their hands. Plenty of time to update. Then you do a lot of cancelling. You cancel two Tens with an Ace and one Ten with a 7 or 8. It is really very, very easy to do. Or if you see an Ace and a 7 and 8 together you know that is four and then it cancels four Tens. Then as each player continued to play their hand you update the AA89mTc. The shoe game is so slow that there is PLENTY of time to update the AA89mTc.
Again I explained how tot update the AA89mTc in at least TEN previous posts but I get the same question asked again and again and again and I get the same complaints that it is too difficult for some players to do.
Last edited by bjanalyst; 01-30-2019 at 07:04 PM.
Firstly, I can and allow to make complaints about your system because it sucks!
Those eight advantages of the KO with XmYc does not result in outperforming Hi-OPT2ASC, in terms of SCORE. So, no need to dissect those eight advantages you pointed out for KO with XmYc. I have already mention this in my previous post.
This shows your system requires more effect and more side count to keep compare to Hi-OPT II with ASC. I don’t care if you are using casino chip to keep the count. You shouldn’t have to use casino chips. The fact that you are require to use casino chips it show that it is harder to keep the count mentally. This is what I mean by making things worse. You have to make new level of changes to HL with AA78mTc and 5m6c to not even get close to the SCORE of Hi-OPT II with ASC? Why can't your system just outperform Hi-OPT II with ASC just with AA78mTc? Instead you need to add in 5m6c side count.
Hello, you are counting the Aces two time so Ace, Ace, 8, 9, -T makes five cards. I didn’t say rank.
You better be sure that keeping track of 5m7c alone outperforms other level 2 or level 3 count systems before you suggest that to anyone. Your system is baloney. No, I am not going to use your system. My own system I created is better than yours and it doesn’t require that many components of side count.
Simulation needed.
KO + AA89mTc +5m7c = Primary count + secondary count + secondary count might beat Hi-OPT II + ASC = Primary count + Ace side count.
KO + AA89mTc +5m7c = 3 components
Hi-OPT II + ASC = 2 components
It is losing battle for KO + AA89mTc +5m7c because you need more effort to achieve the same results. You have to do more work with KO + AA89mTc +5m7c vs Hi-OPT + ASC. This shows that Hi-OPT + ASC is more efficient compare to KO + AA89mTc +5m7c.
Last edited by seriousplayer; 01-30-2019 at 07:22 PM.
There was no simulation of KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c to compare to HO2 with ASC. So you cannot comment about it theoretical gain.
However I can make logical estimates for the gain. I showed that the BC of KO with 5m7c beats HO2 with ASC. And I also showed on a situation by situation basis that KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c beat HO2 in the majority of cases and in many cases by a significant amount.
I also showed that if LS if offered, the KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c is even better. Using the LS EoR the BC of KO with 5m7c is increased even more over the HO2 with ASC. And if LS if offered, the KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c beats the HO2 with ASC in EVERY SINGLE LS decision.
So the conclusion is KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c beats HO2 with ASC in both PE and BE and so overall KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c is more powerful.
Again I posted complete details of this in a previous post and again users are rattling off their questions without bothering to read previous post and I end up answered the same questions OVER and OVER that I answered before.
READ PREVOIUS POSTS BEFORE ASKING QUESTOINS THAT WERE ANSWERED BEFORE.
You want to repeat? Here is my response:
KO + AA89mTc +5m7c = Primary count + secondary count + secondary count might beat Hi-OPT II + ASC = Primary count + Ace side count.
KO + AA89mTc +5m7c = 3 components
Hi-OPT II + ASC = 2 components
It is losing battle for KO + AA89mTc +5m7c because you need more effort to achieve the same results. You have to do more work with KO + AA89mTc +5m7c vs Hi-OPT + ASC. This shows that Hi-OPT + ASC is more efficient compare to KO + AA89mTc +5m7c.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks