True Count in DD game?

**Daithy** · 03-03-2013, 10:03 AM

Just a seemingly stupid question. I haven't played in a casino yet and I am far from it. I'm all new to this. I still haven't picked a counting system yet. Everybody on the net runs statistics of 1 million hands via some softwares which are probably good. But I couldn't find one and perhaps I am a bit old fashioned and prefer more life-like simulation ( a deck of cards). So at this point I only used SD (I know it is a different game from Multi deck completely) and tried different systems, HiLow (disappointing), JSTAT (not great), Kiss III (not bad at all) and Zen (deck count not the house edge version).

HiLow and JSTAT were a disaster in a single deck game actually ended losing money (note: that I followed perfect basic strategy for a single deck game made exactly for the game I played S17 with a very few exceptions like stand 16 vs 10 on a high count etc). Played exactly the same way with Zen and K3 and both performed well, Zen seemed a bit more wild though (higher loses higher wins) but all in all they were very close I used 1-6 units betting spread for a single deck.

Today I got 6 decks so I could practice

(note: I prefer it that way rather than running 10,000 hands in a simulator, I am more likely to go to casino and have a 3-4 hour session, so I do the same at home with 6 decks, having 3-4 hour sessions continuing day after day with the bankroll left from the prvious session). I had to make a choice between K3 and Zen 'cos I ain't putting both systems into my head and master none. Since I didn't find a proper guide for bet spreading for K3 on the net and have one for Zen (basically 1-10 for 6 deck and TC= betting unit,,,,1-6 for a SD and DD). Please experienced players correct me if I've anything wrong in the above so I can mend it, like bad BSpread or inferior system. And a thought crossed my mind as to how do you get your true count from a double deck as in like RC divided by either 1 or 2 (whichever seems closer)? Even in the 6D game when my RC is +11 for example and there seems to be 2.5 decks left so is it OK to settle it with +4 true count? Also is ok or is it inferior to use Zen on SD or DD games?

**AussiePlayer** · 03-03-2013, 10:13 AM

The only thing you've gotten wrong is that your results are completely irrelevant. Even if you played 10 million hands on your kitchen table, they'd still be largely irrelevant. It is simply too small of a sample size. I don't run any simulations of less than 1 billion hands, that's gonna take you a while with 6 decks of cards.

If you're looking for a simulator, this is the only one worth purchasing: http://qfit.com/

**Roscoe** · 03-03-2013, 10:33 AM

I just cracked open the CVData simulator, for the first time, this morning. I am so delighted to find it's easier to use than I had expected: way easier. I'm about halfway through the user guide. It's software that will help me immediately.

**Daithy** · 03-03-2013, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by AussiePlayer

The only thing you've gotten wrong is that your results are completely irrelevant. Even if you played 10 million hands on your kitchen table, they'd still be largely irrelevant. It is simply too small of a sample size. I don't run any simulations of less than 1 billion hands, that's gonna take you a while with 6 decks of cards.

If you're looking for a simulator, this is the only one worth purchasing: http://qfit.com/

I understand where you coming from. However it is already established that Zen works by those sims. It's like saying playing in a casino is completely irrelevant because you cannot make money there due to not playing enough hands in casino. The concept is to be playing hands in a casino and the best simulation is my kitchen table. You would be correct I were trying to develop a system I am only putting to practice already perfected system.

**Norm** · 03-03-2013, 11:14 AM

Sorry, but this is not correct. There are hundreds of books that "prove" that progression systems work according to kitchen table sims. They are all wrong.

**Daithy** · 03-03-2013, 11:17 AM

Originally Posted by Norm

Sorry, but this is not correct. There are hundreds of books that "prove" that progression systems work according to kitchen table sims. They are all wrong.

So what do you suggest? Are you saying that Zen count with bet spread 1-10 on a 6 deck game loses money? (Assuming good rules S17, insurance , double down etc)

**Norm** · 03-03-2013, 11:23 AM

Read. There are numerous studies and discussions comparing systems. Here's my 27 page study: Strategy Comparisons. It ends with the largest simulation ever run.

**Daithy** · 03-03-2013, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by Norm

Read. There are numerous studies and discussions comparing systems. Here's my 27 page study: Strategy Comparisons. It ends with the largest simulation ever run.

I have read enough, however I appreciate your link. I find is somewhat straying off the topic. I don't need to compare systems anymore since I have chosen Zen (which is already proven to be effective). You didn't answer my question which was
- So what do you suggest? Are you saying that Zen count with bet spread 1-10 on a 6 deck game loses money? (Assuming good rules S17, insurance , double down etc) -

**Norm** · 03-03-2013, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by Daithy

So what do you suggest? Are you saying that Zen count with bet spread 1-10 on a 6 deck game loses money?

No, didn't say that.

**Daithy** · 03-03-2013, 11:52 AM

So what exactly did you mean by ""Sorry, but this is not correct. There are hundreds of books that "prove" that progression systems work according to kitchen table sims. They are all wrong.""

**Norm** · 03-03-2013, 12:03 PM

I am saying the same thing that Aussieplayer is saying. Kitchen table results have no meaning. This is the process a typical progression system author goes through:

Try a progression. It failed.
Adjust and try again. It failed.
Adjust and try it again. It worked. Eureka, I found the magic progression. Gotta write a book.

Only it was pure chance. The first attempt or tenth could have just as easily worked the one time it was tried. This has nothing to do with what will happen in the future because the number of events is statistically meaningless. So, yes Zen works. But, your kitchen table test didn't prove it.

**Daithy** · 03-03-2013, 12:07 PM

Originally Posted by Norm

I am saying the same thing that Aussieplayer is saying. Kitchen table results have no meaning. This is the process a typical progression system author goes through:

Try a progression. It failed.
Adjust and try again. It failed.
Adjust and try it again. It worked. Eureka, I found the magic progression. Gotta write a book.

Only it was pure chance. The first attempt or tenth could have just as easily worked the one time it was tried. This has nothing to do with what will happen in the future because the number of events is statistically meaningless. So, yes Zen works. But, your kitchen table test didn't prove it.

I see your point and had seen it from the very start. Let me reform the question. Will Zen work in a casino?