I've seen a lot of bad comparisons over the years. The worst was when ET Fan insisted that the only accurate way to compare HiLo and OPP is to use running counts for play and betting in HiLo and to use no indices. Worse than the Speed Count sims, where bets were raised with HiLo at a negative EV.
"I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
The KO and KO.bal are mathematically identical counts. If the sim program was designed to calculate decks remaining EXACTLY to the exact number of cards remaining and if the sim program was made to calculated True Counts EXACTLY then the results of KO and KO.bal would be exactly the same because they are the same count. The reasons why the sims may differ a little is inaccuracies in estimation of dr and true count calculations for various true counts.Originally Posted by seriousplayer
I will attach some exhibits that shows the KO and KO.bal are equivalent mathematically - they are identical twins!
If the first exhibit I showed the index calculations for KO and KO.bal and you will see
CC(KO, KO.bal) = 100%
CC(KO, EoR) = CC(KO.bal, EoR) = 58.35%
SD(KO) = SD(KO.bal) = 0.9166
SLOPE(EoR,KO) = SLOPE(EoR,KO.bal) = 0.771%
Infinite Deck Index (hard 16 v T for KO) = 0.08
Infinite Deck Index (hard 16 v T for KO.bal) = 0.08
You get the exact same results using either count.
Also I never said that I did not make any typos such as misnaming counts or such.
I said despite everyone complaining about my system, no one has of yet found any mistakes in my computations. I hear a lot of complaints but not one person has shown that I made any computational mistakes.
Also every single prediction that I made about the results of the sims came out to be true and the sims have shown the my KO system is superior to HO2 w ASC for the back counted no LS game. When negative indices are added, my KO system will come even closer to the HO2 w ASC play all. Whether it will beat it for play all I do not know but it will be very close. And when LS is added, KO with ASC will be history. Those are my predictions. Now lets see if they come true.
KO & KO.bal (1).jpg
KO & KO.bal (2).jpg
How many times do I have to repeat the same thing. The HL was NEVER, EVER, EVER my recommndedn system. I just used that as a starting point toge tthe sims rolling and see what happens. The name of my 2nd book is HL with 45m79c and the name of my 3rd book is HL with 45m79c and AA89mTc. My fourth book is HL with pluls minus side counts written only because many players want to keep the HL count. For the sigle deck game I suggesed using HL with Am6c and 7m9c side counts. But for the shoe game I sitll receommneded KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c as can be seen in each chapter of the HL with plus minuse side counts that I included the analogous KO wiht the KO side counts right next to teh HL. GET IT! HL was NEVER my recommended count for the shoe game and my 2nd and 3rd books were published WAY BEFORE I ever made a single post on this forum. So stop binging up the HL system comparisons which were never my recommended count.
Actually my recommended count was KO with 45m79c and AA89mTc. For simplicity I decided to substitute 5m7c for 45m79c. The result was a loss in both BE and PE but I felt the keeping the 45m79c with AA89mTc would be just too complicated to do and result in errors. Thus I simplified to 5m7c. If 45m79c, which was my original suggestion, was used with KO and AA89mTc the results would have been even a larger SCORE. But my suggestion if you want to increase the SCORE further would be to keep a third side count to add to the KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c. Third side counts that I analyzed in my books are Am6c, Am8c and 6m2c. But let's not get into 3 side counts as then the system really does get to be complex.
So STOP comparing the HL system with the HO2 w ASC which I NEVER recommended and was used just as a test for getting the simulations done and see what happened. Only mention my KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c.
I never said EoR were exact. I said that EoR were linear LSL estimates for blackjack. And they are a GOOD approximation. The fact that they are a good approxmation is born out with the latest simluationsn resuilts where I used ONLY EoR for all of my computations and you can see that the sim reuslits verify that EoR really do work very well.
Also you had mentioned something like EoR being fudge factors and just giving just a rough idea of what counts to use and where to go. So you were just the opposite of "exact". You basically said EoR were such gross approximations that they were not very useful at all.
If EoR are so rough then why have they been publihsed to 4 or 5 significant figures? Also if EoR were so rough then why did sims show that my KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c system beat out the HO2 w ASC for back counting where I used only EoR to calculate my KO system.
I never said EoR are exact but I will say here that EoR are VERY GOOD approximations.
Every prediction I made using EoR came true and we will see if my last prediction comes true, also based on EoR. My latest prediction is that when LS is simulated, my KO will outperform the HO2 w ASC to an even greater degree than for the no LS game. And this prediction is based on guess what, EoR!
So no need for me to expand on my predictions and the accuracy of the EoR. I will let the sim results speak for me.
I had hardly any negative indices that I gave Gronbog to simulate because I designed my KO system for back counting. For the play all game you need some negative indices. I did not add 100 indices. I added just a few more important negative indices that I would like Gronbog to add to the simulations and this was done just for the play all game and see what happens.
Here are the extra few negative indices that I asked Grnobog to add. There are seven more negative hit/sand indices and 15 more double and split indices that I asked to be added. I think the real problem lies with making marginal doubles and splits in negative counts where you are putting a lot of extra money on the table with a negative EV if the true count is negative enough Very risking my making marginal doubles and splits in a very negative count.
KO negative indices.jpg
My comments were about your system alone.
Again. My comment was on your system against Hiopt2/ASC playall. The sim included both play-all and back counting. Your system lost miserably in play all and barely geeked out a win in back counting. Overall I would say your system did not outperform Hiopt2/ASC.
How can you make this claim when you never generated anything using sims to compare to it? Maybe your method is a pail shadow of what another method would say to do. You have no way of knowing how good it is with nothing to compare it to.
EoRs have been published with anywhere from 2 decimal to 4 decimal places. They are full deck EoRs and only accurate for a full deck no matter how many decimal places they go to. After the first round played they are no longer accurate to 4 decimal places and may not be accurate at all deep in a shoe. That has been explained to you repeatedly but you never seem to understand it. If one ace is removed the EoR of a second ace removed is different. Now how can that be viewed as accurate except before any cards are dealt?
Why do you say this when everyone knows it is not true? You erode your credibility.
I am not sure what you thought you would accomplish here, but you showed everyone you can't count well enough to count by twos. You think it is worth going to a tremendous amount of extra work to get close to the same place something much easier and less complicated would do. You never learn anything from sims when you have someone go to the trouble of running them for you. You showed having some of the biggest experts in BJ tell you what you are doing wrong either goes over your head or is ignored, which shows you probably don't understand BJ well.
This is you bjanalyst in the video:
https://youtu.be/QSkD-5dboBA
I have said if you made a typo it is wrong for the third time. Do you understand any English or American??
Stand your ground bjanalyst. I’m probably not going to use your count, but I’m in your camp. I can only imagine how much time and work went into your system, with all your spreadsheets and calculations. I’d still like to know how to use your system for DD I asked you about. There’s a chance I might use that side count since it looks easier.
I don’t know if you’ve seen that quote where the frog is getting eaten by a stork and he has his head in the stork’s beak and his hands are around the stork’s neck and the caption says “Don’t give up; Don’t ever give up”. This reminds me somewhat of how your fighting this battle. You’re the frog and the stork are all the bj experts here constantly attacking you, and you aren’t giving them an inch. It’s good to see someone stand up for what they believe.
If he could show he learned anything at all from all the expert advice and sims he might make people have confidence that he can learn enough to get to a point that he might know what he is doing. So far he hasn't been able to instill ant confidence in him based on his lack of ability to learn.
You sound like a "ploppy" in blackjack. Instead of wasting all these time fighting and fighting he could of revised his system. Bj experts like dogman already gave us the answer. He is just stubborn to not listen. It is not about not giving up. It is about when things don't work revisions need to be made. Wasted all these time, energy, and work. With all these spreadsheets and calculations he could of just drop the idea and reverse all his methods.
Last edited by seriousplayer; 02-18-2019 at 04:07 PM.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks