See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 66 of 72 FirstFirst ... 16566465666768 ... LastLast
Results 846 to 858 of 936

Thread: Adding AA78mTc side count to High Low

  1. #846


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by seriousplayer View Post
    Another question for bjanalyst. What will you suggest player who uses KO+AA89mTc+5m7c if they don't want to use casino chips to keep the side count?
    For the 5m7c which is very simple you can keep both the KO and 5m7c in your head. I suggested chips for the AA89mTc to make it easier to keep at least for the begininng player. There are other techniques that I mentioned previously and I wil cover again later once my system has been shown to beat HO2 w ASC. But keeping one stack of chips should not be that obvious and should not be a problem. Methodically moving around two stacks of chips may draw attention but I do have ideas where you can eliminate even that AA89mTc stack of chips altogether, if you must, and will cover them later.

    Once it has been shown that my KO system beats that HO2 w ASC I will go into more detilas on tricks to use the system and shortcuts and more.

    For now, let's wait for Gronbog's results but I will stand by my predictions which are my KO system will beat HO2 w ASC for the play all in addition to the back count and will leave the HO2 w ASC in the dust for the LS game.
    Last edited by bjanalyst; 03-15-2019 at 08:27 PM.

  2. #847


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bjanalyst View Post


    For the 5m7c which is very simple you can keep both the KO and 5m7c in your head. I suggested chips for the AA89mTc to make it easier to keep at least for the begininng player. There are other techniques that I mentioned previously and I wil cover again later once my system has been shown to beat HO2 w ASC. But keeping one stack of chips should not be that obvious and should not be a problem. Methodically moving around two stacks of chips may draw attention but I do have ideas where you can eliminate even that AA89mTc stack of chips altogether, if you must, and will cover them later.

    Once it has been shown that my KO system beats that HO2 w ASC I will go into more detilas on tricks to use the system and shortcuts and more.

    Let's wait for Gronbog's results but I will stand by my predictions which are my KO system will beat HO2 w ASC for the play all in addiotin to the back count and will leave the HO2 w ASC in the dust for the LS game.
    You didn't answer my question. You suggest using chips for AA89mTc but my question was what would you suggest if someone don't want to use casino to keep the AA89mTc. Don't try to dissipate the question. What you trying to say is that you don't know.

  3. #848


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bjanalyst View Post
    And remember, simulations just show POWER. My KO system also beats the HO2 w ASC for ease of use, accuracy, camouflage plays and help with side bets.
    Simulations show more than just "power" (whatever that means.)

    Also, you're full of shit. HOII w/ ASC is *much* simpler than using your three count method that has been proposed. In fact, I would venture to guess that a HOII w/ ASC and a 89vT count would beat the living shit out of your system (if we are to use difficulty of use as parity.) Considering you are adding complexity to something that should be simple. Why not go hog-wild then? Go ahead! Run your KO with all your bells and whistles and compare it to HOII w/ ASC & 89vT for playing *and* betting.

    I (unlike you) will refrain from speculating about how *my* idea should pan out. (I already have an idea...and that idea is correct! Of course, you would be wise to keep quite until then.)
    Last edited by lij45o6; 03-16-2019 at 01:19 AM.

  4. #849


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by seriousplayer View Post
    You didn't answer my question. You suggest using chips for AA89mTc but my question was what would you suggest if someone don't want to use casino to keep the AA89mTc. Don't try to dissipate the question. What you trying to say is that you don't know.
    Why do you argue with him?

    He is a nobody system pusher who is taking a simple idea (someone else's idea to be exact!) and twisting it into some weird brain-child so he can make a quick buck and feel self important.

    How he has responded to criticism should indicate what type of personality he is.

    I will refrain until Gron feels the desire to sim.

  5. #850


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by seriousplayer View Post
    You didn't answer my question. You suggest using chips for AA89mTc but my question was what would you suggest if someone don't want to use casino to keep the AA89mTc. Don't try to dissipate the question. What you trying to say is that you don't know.
    You do not need chips to keep both counts. The used of chips just makes it simplier but if it leads to possible scrunity by the casino then don't. The 5m7c is so cimple it can be kept in your head with the KO count. So the only count you really need to consider using chips for is the AA89mTc. Moving only one stack of chips only after updated AA89mTc for AA89mTs (s = seen duing the current round) may not draw attention. But if you are even affraid of that I have some other suggestions.

    But we are getting into techniques on how to best use the KO with 5m7c and AA89mTc here. Frist let simluations shows that my KO system beats the HO2 w ASC. Then I will explain ideas of how to keep both 5m7c and AA89mTc without using chips if using chips draws attention from the pit. But I have used chips and no one has ever bothered or questioned me. You can always say somthing like you are keeping track of wins and losses or something else crazy but I will go over other ideas other than chips to keep both 5m7c and AA89mTc after Gronbog's simatilons prove KO bests HO2 w ASC.

    Norman was asking if a side count of 8's and 9's were added to HO2 w ASC would that beat that system would beat the KO with 5m7c and AA89mTc for LS for example. I did some CC comparisons for LS and Norman is correct. When you use all three side counts, Aces, 8's and 9's with HO2 the this total system does best KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c for LS but that is at the cost of keeping three side counts with the complicated HO2 and adding 8 and 9 side count to the Ace side count would be difficult to do, involve approximations and then difficult to incorporate as the HO2, Adef, 8def and 9def would have to be taken into consideration to make a simple LS decision.

    But to answer Norman's question, I will show the LS CC here. But HO2 is using 3 side counts. If I add Am8c as a 3rd side count to the KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c then my KO system again outperforms the HO2 with side counts of Aces, 8's and 9's for LS as shown in the attached chart.

    But I am not suggestion adding a 3rd side count. Two side counts with the KO, 5m7c and AA89mTc is enough. I am just mentioning this because Norman asked that question. So the attached file answers Norman's question.

    And I will give more details AFTER simulations show my KO system beats HO2 w ASC.
    LS.jpg
    Last edited by bjanalyst; 03-17-2019 at 11:37 AM.

  6. #851


    0 out of 2 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by dogman_1234 View Post
    Simulations show more than just "power" (whatever that means.)

    Also, you're full of shit. HOII w/ ASC is *much* simpler than using your three count method that has been proposed. In fact, I would venture to guess that a HOII w/ ASC and a 89vT count would beat the living shit out of your system (if we are to use difficulty of use as parity.) Considering you are adding complexity to something that should be simple. Why not go hog-wild then? Go ahead! Run your KO with all your bells and whistles and compare it to HOII w/ ASC & 89vT for playing *and* betting.

    I (unlike you) will refrain from speculating about how *my* idea should pan out. (I already have an idea...and that idea is correct! Of course, you would be wise to keep quite until then.)
    Again, wait for Gronbog's simulations. And my only comment on your statement of complexity is that the HO2 is the base primary count. It is a complicated level 2 count where there are six ranks with an absolute tag values of 2 (4, 5, and Tens) and four ranks with an absolute value of 1 (2, 3, 6 and 7) and they all have to be calculated at once and you state the this HO2 level two count is simpler that to keep than the level one KO which is the base count for my system.

    We can discuss this further after the simulations prove that my KO system beats HO2 w ASC.

    Every single prediction that I have made so far has been shown to be correct. And my latest two predictions will also be shown to be correct.

    (1) When negative indices are added my KO system will outperform HO2 w ASC for the play all in addition to back counting (which has already been shown the be the case).

    (2) When LS is used, my KO system will perform even better against the HO2 w ASC than with no LS.

    So let's wait for simulation results please. You will see that I am correct. Then what are you going to say?

  7. #852


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by dogman_1234 View Post
    Why do you argue with him?

    He is a nobody system pusher who is taking a simple idea (someone else's idea to be exact!) and twisting it into some weird brain-child so he can make a quick buck and feel self important.

    How he has responded to criticism should indicate what type of personality he is.

    I will refrain until Gron feels the desire to sim.
    What are you talking about. This was entirely MY idea. I first ran my ideas bty both Arnold Synder and ETFAN in 2011 and have been working on it on and off since. No one else every thought about this before. All other blackjack books, including Griffin, said any side counted rank could not be included in the primary count - if a rank were included in the primary count it could not be used as a side count. That is that all previous literature said. I prove this not to be the case.

    And the HO2 was built on that premise that ranks side counted could not be used in the primary count. Thus Aces, 8's and 9's were not used in the primary HO2 count and so the HO2 used them as side counts. There is evena chapter in Griffin's Theory of Blackjack where he calculated a CC matrix where the side counts were correlated with the primacy count and showed how complicate this CC matrix is and almost impossible to use and said that side count ranks included in the primary count would be just too complicated to use.

    I have four books out there all with my ideas. I did get some help from ETFAN on some theoretical issues at the beginning but all ideas were mine. I take great exception to be accused of plagarism.

    One that that Xlibris did was that their team checked for any other copyrighted material before they copyrighted my books. They found none and that is because no one else thought about using plus minus side counts with ranks already included in the primary count or if they did they did not know how to incorporate such information correctly.

    My ideas are copyrighted because they are my original ideas. If you want to say you do not like my system for whatever reasson then fine, but do not accuse me of plagiarism.
    Last edited by bjanalyst; 03-17-2019 at 12:10 PM.

  8. #853


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by dogman_1234 View Post
    Why do you argue with him?

    He is a nobody system pusher who is taking a simple idea (someone else's idea to be exact!) and twisting it into some weird brain-child so he can make a quick buck and feel self important.
    Besides accusing me of stealing someone else ideas, which I have shown is not the case, you are accusing me of being a system pusher out to make a quick buck pedaling some worthless system.

    I showed my 2007 royalties were $2 and this year they were like $25. There are many complaints on the internet about Xlbirs not paying royalties. I do not need the money and I have done this as a hobby. Also I have given all of this information for free and never expected of wanted any compensation so what are you talking about?

    So

    (1) Stop accusing me of plagiarism! These were my sole ideas that I have come up with my myself since 2011 and they are all copyrighted by four books with Xlibris. Even Gronbog had to put specialized code in his program when he first ran my simulations for my plus/minus side counts and I had to explain to him how it worked as no one before me has done this before. So stop accusing me a plagiarism right now as I am starting to get upset.

    (2) Stop accusing me as a system pusher trying to pedal a worthless system to make a quick buck.

    Stop with the insults and false accusations and try to be respectful and polite. I do not insult you and I expect you not to insult me.

    And wait for the simulation results and you will see that I am correct.
    Last edited by bjanalyst; 03-17-2019 at 12:09 PM.

  9. #854


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bjanalyst View Post
    Again, wait for Gronbog's simulations. And my only comment on your statement of complexity is that the HO2 is the base primary count. It is a complicated level 2 count where there are six ranks with an absolute tag values of 2 (4, 5, and Tens) and four ranks with an absolute value of 1 (2, 3, 6 and 7) and they all have to be calculated at once and you state the this HO2 level two count is simpler that to keep than the level one KO which is the base count for my system.

    We can discuss this further after the simulations prove that my KO system beats HO2 w ASC.

    Every single prediction that I have made so far has been shown to be correct. And my latest two predictions will also be shown to be correct.

    (1) When negative indices are added my KO system will outperform HO2 w ASC for the play all in addition to back counting (which has already been shown the be the case).

    (2) When LS is used, my KO system will perform even better against the HO2 w ASC than with no LS.

    So let's wait for simulation results please. You will see that I am correct. Then what are you going to say?
    Your results don't count because you are comparing your count which is three components to Hi-OPT II with ASC which is one components. You can keeps saying it but I will never give up. You lucky this is Norm's forum because if it is my forum I will bar you off the forum for harassment and abuse.

  10. #855


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bjanalyst View Post
    You do not need chips to keep both counts. The used of chips just makes it simplier but if it leads to possible scrunity by the casino then don't. The 5m7c is so cimple it can be kept in your head with the KO count. So the only count you really need to consider using chips for is the AA89mTc. Moving only one stack of chips only after updated AA89mTc for AA89mTs (s = seen duing the current round) may not draw attention. But if you are even affraid of that I have some other suggestions.

    But we are getting into techniques on how to best use the KO with 5m7c and AA89mTc here. Frist let simluations shows that my KO system beats the HO2 w ASC. Then I will explain ideas of how to keep both 5m7c and AA89mTc without using chips if using chips draws attention from the pit. But I have used chips and no one has ever bothered or questioned me. You can always say somthing like you are keeping track of wins and losses or something else crazy but I will go over other ideas other than chips to keep both 5m7c and AA89mTc after Gronbog's simatilons prove KO bests HO2 w ASC.

    Norman was asking if a side count of 8's and 9's were added to HO2 w ASC would that beat that system would beat the KO with 5m7c and AA89mTc for LS for example. I did some CC comparisons for LS and Norman is correct. When you use all three side counts, Aces, 8's and 9's with HO2 the this total system does best KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c for LS but that is at the cost of keeping three side counts with the complicated HO2 and adding 8 and 9 side count to the Ace side count would be difficult to do, involve approximations and then difficult to incorporate as the HO2, Adef, 8def and 9def would have to be taken into consideration to make a simple LS decision.

    But to answer Norman's question, I will show the LS CC here. But HO2 is using 3 side counts. If I add Am8c as a 3rd side count to the KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c then my KO system again outperforms the HO2 with side counts of Aces, 8's and 9's for LS as shown in the attached chart.

    But I am not suggestion adding a 3rd side count. Two side counts with the KO, 5m7c and AA89mTc is enough. I am just mentioning this because Norman asked that question. So the attached file answers Norman's question.

    And I will give more details AFTER simulations show my KO system beats HO2 w ASC.
    My question was what other methods if someone don't want to use casino to keep count? Again, don't try to dissipate my question. You can post all the charts you want but demand an answer right now. There is no waiting. You can't answer my question you are full of shit.
    Last edited by seriousplayer; 03-17-2019 at 12:14 PM.

  11. #856


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by dogman_1234 View Post
    Why do you argue with him?
    Because he thinks I am here to play with him. I am NOT. You got to show him who you are.

  12. #857


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bjanalyst View Post
    Besides accusing me of stealing someone else ideas, which I have shown is not the case, you are accusing me of being a system pusher out to make a quick buck pedaling some worthless system.
    You are not being accused. You are!!!

  13. #858


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by seriousplayer View Post
    You are not being accused. You are!!!

    You are VERY disrespectful and insulting.
    You do not have to like or use my system but you have no right to accuse me of plagarism.

    You need to apologize immediately.


    Xlibris has a team that scours for any copyright infringements before they issue a copyright. The copyright checking takes 2 or 3 days and they have done this for each of my four books. All four of my books are copyrighted. If I had copied someone else work Xlibris would have found out and my work would not have been copywritten and I would have been sued by now. There are no lawsuits because my work is original. Even when I first ran my ideas in 2011 with ETFAN he even told me no one else ever thought about using plus/minus side counts which ranks already included in the primary count. And even if someone did, they had no idea how to incorporate these side counts with the primary count.

    Look at Xlibris website and you will see my books are copywritten. If they were plagiarized Xlibris would have never been able to have them copywritten. As I stated Xlibirs has a specialized copyright team to check on this. So I have proof that my material is my sole idea.

    You on the other hand are making unsubstantiated statements accusing me of plagiarism with zero proof.

    Your attacks and designed to be malicious and hateful for whatever reasons you have and you need to STOP right now and apologize.

    Also in my books in the credit section at the beginning of each of my books I gave credit to ETFAN who helped me with some theory at the very beginning of my work. But the ideas were all mine. Also at the end of each of my books I listed the references that I used to write my book. I listed everything that I used. The ideas and work was mine alone.


    And in any exhibits in my books where I used material as a basis for my exhibits I gave links to that material and/or included footnotes. I gave credit to anyone and everyone whose information I used as a basis to my exhibits but I put together the exhibits and did all analysis myself. I gave 100% credit to anyone's information that I used.

    Also I created the Excel file to calculation values of k1 and k2 and indices and I came up with the acronyms such as AACpTCp and crc and thought of creating a table of critical running counts. The Excel file I created in 2011 took me 6 months to develop and ETFAN reviewed it for accuracy. I used that Excel file to calculate all of my k's and indices. And I gave a copy of my Excel file to both Norman and Gronbog. And you are still accusing me of plagarism? I am beyond insulted.


    Show proof that someone else has published the indices and values of k1 and k2 and all of the side count combinations that I have come up in my four books!

    There are none so you need to apologize right now.

    And you will see after simulations are done that my predictions will be correct once again.



    .
    Last edited by bjanalyst; 03-17-2019 at 01:32 PM.

Page 66 of 72 FirstFirst ... 16566465666768 ... 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.