Adding AA78mTc side count to High Low

[bjanalyst]

Hitting all of the values of HO2 with a positive constant is skewing. Why don't you compare the SD of both KO and Hi-OPT II as is?

Here is how I compared true count accruacy of HO2 and KO. Actually HO2 - 2*(Adef) vs KO + (1/2)*(5m7c) but I wlil jsut call them HO2 and KO for simplicty in this discussion.

I took KO true counts of 1 through 8 which I calculated the basic strategy players advantage (bspa). I then calculated the equivalent HO2 count with the same bspa and then I compare the accuracy of the resulting true counts assuming the same error in estimating decks played. See attached file.

The point of all of this is that the KO system had a pivot of a true count of 4 and give more accurate true count calculations around it pivot that do balance counts with a pivot of a true count of zero and it is most important to have true count accuracy when large bets are out which is around a KO true count of 4.
KO vs HO2 true count accuracy.jpg

[DSchles]

Is it possible for you to stop posting? Do you have an scintilla of self-control to do that? You have repeated the same things ad nauseam and ad infinitim. Absolutely everyone here is sick to death of the rantings. PLEASE BE QUIET! You have stated 100 times that we are waiting for the final sims.

So, for the love of God, SHUT UP while you're waiting!

Don

[bjanalyst]

. And, EoRs do not apply to KO.

I cannot believe you said EoR do not apply to KO. Of course they do!

I used EoR with KO in all of my calculations. Are you implying that EoR only apply to balanced counts. That is not true.

EoR apply to any and all counts, balanced or unbalanced.

Also any unbalanced count can be converted to a balanced count.

Attached is an exhibit showing KO and KO.bal Both counts are equivalent.

Notice that the Correlation Coefficient between the balanced and unbalanced KO is 100%.

Also note that the SD of both the balanced and unbalanced KO are equal.

Also note that the CC of the KO with EoR and KO.bal with EoR where (EoR was chosen for hard hit/stand on hard 16 v T as an example) are equal.

And finally note that the Slope of EoR with KO and EoR with KO are equal.

Both KO and KO.bal are equivalent. Unbalanced counts can be converted into balanced counts.

EoR can be used with KO and can be used with both balanced and unbalanced counts.
KO & KO.bal.jpg

[bjanalyst]

Is it possible for you to stop posting? Do you have an scintilla of self-control to do that? You have repeated the same things ad nauseam and ad infinitim. Absolutely everyone here is sick to death of the rantings. PLEASE BE QUIET! You have stated 100 times that we are waiting for the final sims.

So, for the love of God, SHUT UP while you're waiting!

Don

Sorry Don. Norman made an incorrect statement when he said EoR do not apply to KO. I had to correct him on that. I have used EoR with KO for all of my calculations. I could let an incorrect statement go uncorrected. I hope you understand.

[stopgambling]

I cannot believe you said EoR do not apply to KO. Of course they do!

I used EoR with KO in all of my calculations. Are you implying that EoR only apply to balanced counts. That is not true.

EoR apply to any and all counts, balanced or unbalanced.

Also any unbalanced count can be converted to a balanced count.

Attached is an exhibit showing KO and KO.bal Both counts are equivalent.

Notice that the Correlation Coefficient between the balanced and unbalanced KO is 100%.

Also note that the SD of both the balanced and unbalanced KO are equal.

Also note that the CC of the KO with EoR and KO.bal with EoR where (EoR was chosen for hard hit/stand on hard 16 v T as an example) are equal.

And finally note that the Slope of EoR with KO and EoR with KO are equal.

Both KO and KO.bal are equivalent. Unbalanced counts can be converted into balanced counts.

EoR can be used with KO and can be used with both balanced and unbalanced counts.
KO & KO.bal.jpg

what is wrong with your EOR . i don't understand. 2.56% for a 5 but .29% for a 2 while an ACe is + .49 xx%?

[Three]

What I am talking about is accuracy. How much does an error in estimating decks remaining affect the accuracy of the true count. I am most interested in accuracy of the true count near the KO's pivot of a true count of 4. By exact I am talking about the KO true count at its pivot of a true count of 4. At the pivot, when KO = 4*n where n = number of decks then tc(KO) = 4 everywhere in the shoe and is totally independent of decks plays. Also I mentioned that the XmYc side counts are exact also. That is because unlike a side counts of Aces, Adef = Ap - 4*dp, an estimation of decks played is needed to calculate Adef. But dp is an estimate and if the dp is off so is Adef. But XmYc does not depend on decks played, So there is no estimation in XmYc and that is what I mean when I said that XmYc is exact.

Also the EoR do apply to KO because the KO can be balanced. The Excel file I sent to Gronbog that ETFAN reviewed used both LSL and PD (Proportional Deflection) and could calculate indices for any number of decks and any count, balanced or unbalanced. I calculated my indices for the HL with AA78mTc and 5m6c using the LSL and EoR. And every time I added more changes, the SCORE increased, which means that my calculation had to be correct.

And I also used EoR for the calculation of the values of k1 and k2 and the indices in KO + k1*(5m7c) + k2*(AA89mTc). Gronbog is going to do the simulations using the unbalanced KO so that the true counts near the KO's pivot of a true count of 4 will be very accurate and is adding in 5m7c and AA89mTc. So let's see what the simulations some up with. They should verify that my technique of using EoR is correct.

Finally, if EoR are so useless, then why has BJA3 listed the EoR to five significant figures? Five significant figures to not mean fudge factors.

So just be patient and wait for Gronbog's results.

I will repeat my prediction. The KO with 5m7c and AA89mTc will be the HO2 w ASC for the no LS game and will definitely beat HO2 with ASC for the LS game.

The KO with 5m7c and AA89mTc was always my choice of counts that I recommended (actually I switch from 45m79c to 5m7c because 45m79c kept with AA89mTc is too difficult so I gave up a bit of power for simplicity). I used HL with AA78mTc and 5m6c as a test of my system because modifying the HL was easier that the unbalanced KO. But again HL was NEVER my recommended count for the shoe game. For the DD game I said use HL with Am6c and 7m9c but for the shoe game use KO with 5m7c and AA89mTc.

So much of this is just plain wrong. The sad part is you don't know it. If you don't use deck estimates to calculate TC then You have error all your estimations using the count because all you have is RC which would only be accurate at a specific RC unless you were at the pivot point. Why do you think REKO uses the pivot point for all its indices? Just because things improve doesn't mean your calculations are right. It shows they adjusted things in the right direction. Try being a fan of Brett Harris if you want to use an unbalanced count and advance it.

You keep talking about deck estimation error but when I am playing a lot I don't even need to look at the discards to know exactly how many decks are left, even with people joining and leaving the shoe. Your assumptions about accuracy are not accurate.

[Dbs6582]

For the DD game I said use HL with Am6c and 7m9c but for the shoe game use KO with 5m7c and AA89mTc.

I had missed this in your past posts. I thought you used AA89mTc for all games. Since I play mostly DD and use HL, I agree it’s probably not two hard keeping a side count using Am6c and 7m9c. Can you explain again how you use this additional information and what boook it’s in? I’m sure it’s in one of your past posts, but there is no way I’ll ever be able to find it. Thanks!

[DSchles]

I had missed this in your past posts. I thought you used AA89mTc for all games. Since I play mostly DD and use HL, I agree it’s probably not two hard keeping a side count using Am6c and 7m9c. Can you explain again how you use this additional information and what boook it’s in? I’m sure it’s in one of your past posts, but there is no way I’ll ever be able to find it. Thanks!

You HAVE to be kidding! Explain AGAIN??!! STOP. Just STOP!

Don

[DSchles]

what is wrong with your EOR . i don't understand. 2.56% for a 5 but .29% for a 2 while an ACe is + .49 xx%?

These are EORs for the specific play 16 vs. T, not global EORs.

Don

[Dbs6582]

You HAVE to be kidding! Explain AGAIN??!! STOP. Just STOP!

Don

Don, if you don’t want to read this thread, just don’t open it. Obviously some people are interested since it has over 20,000 views and over 600 posts. Bjanalyst has not made all the posts. Most the time he’s responding to people’s questions.

Since I have only kept up with this thread off and on, I missed the part where bjanalyst discussed having a different side count for DD. I’m sure he discussed how to use it, but there is no way I’m going to find it in this long thread.

Bjanalyst likes to post so so I thought he could go through this part again. I’ll read it and see if I want to use it. If people don’t want to read it that's their choice. Rather than complaining, they can do what I do when I see a post I’m not interested in. I don’t read it.

Bjanalyst is not breaking any rules. Why are you trying to stop two people from trying to exchange information related to bj on this forum?

[Norm]

Just an FYI. Most views on public forums are the Chinese search engine.

[DSchles]

Bjanalyst is not breaking any rules. Why are you trying to stop two people from trying to exchange information related to bj on this forum?

That's one of the dumber remarks I've seen from you, and they aren't exactly rare.

Don

[Dbs6582]

Just an FYI. Most views on public forums are the Chinese search engine.

Okay, let’s say that true. My main point is this thread has brought some value to some people. I doubt if anybody will use bjanalyst system, but there has been some good exchanges on how counts are developed and determined to have value.

I’ve actually learned quite a bit from this thread, but it’s not only from bjanalyst. I thought Three made some of his best posts (since I’ve been on this forum) responding to Bjanalyst. The comments from you, Don and some of the other experts was also enlightening. It was good to see a good healthy exchange of ideas.

Yes, it got a little long, but that was because someone continued to debate with Bjanalyst and he wasn’t going to backdown. If people didn’t like the thread, they had the option to not read it. I don’t understand why some wanted it shut down. It obviously was adding value to some, and there wasn’t much trolling or name calling going on so why not let it go on, which is what you did.

Not that you probably care about my opinion, but I was glad you didn’t shut it down.