Is an unbalanced count 'cheating' vs balanced? Starting the journey...

**KC_APS** · 03-04-2013, 08:23 PM

I just wanted to thank you all for the invaluable advice on the forum. I just had a couple of quick questions I hope I can get some thoughts / advice on!

After three weeks I am willing to state my BS is about perfect (successful checkout, average of 2 errors per 500 hands in weekly recaps). The next step would seem to be to adopt a counting system. After much reflection I have decided on the Red7 count, simply because I want to be able to completely master the count and not worry about potential TC conversion errors / deck estimation etc. Am I cheating? It seems this will reduce my prep time by about a month, but more importantly play perfectly according to the RC throughout.

Having avidly read Mr. Tilton as my primary tome, supplemented w/ Blackbelt in BJ, Professional BJ, BJ for Blood, BJ for Pro's, Burning the Tables (love this book!) (all read) and pending BJ attack I can't help but feel perhaps I'm ... cheating!

NT advocates H/L of course, but I can't help feeling Red7 would be as effective in shoe games realistically ... or would it?! I have reviewed the online tables and statistics - but would like it from the horses mouth so to speak! I don't want to cut corners but would be willing to sacrifice a small edge in a game of small edges for that consistency and accuracy.

FYI in case it makes a difference - The plan is another three months prep time, then the rest of the year red chipping locally before beginning the Vegas plan next year. I will be sufficiently bankrolled for green chip play at least at 1/2 Kelly level and will be shooting for the best strip shoe games I can lay my hands on. No 2D. There may be a chance of partnership as well, adopting appropriate strategies thereof. I have been going to Vegas as a break even at least NL poker player about 3 times a year for the past decade, and so casino's don't bother me in the slightest.

I appreciate there are similar posts about this - but every situation is a little different so I thought I would see what the experts think in my situation as described.

Phew - think that's it for now! I certainly hope I will be able to achieve this by observing the 7 Ps and the appropriate discipline to see it through. I welcome the opportunity to give back to these forums as well, given time and experience over the year! Thanks so much for your time!

**Frostbyte** · 03-04-2013, 08:49 PM

Welcome to the forum! We hope you enjoy your stay. Play nice with others, and keep your hands and feet inside the vehicle at all times.

Red-7 is a fine choice for someone starting out, and it can be an excellent system from cradle to grave if you choose to make it one. Start with the suit-counting method, or with counting all 7s as .5, whichever you're more comfortable with. The latter method is somewhat more accurate, and you'll want to graduate to it eventually. Red-7 has weak indices in running count mode, but these matter less in shoes. If you're using it in RC mode as Arnie describes, it will fall a teensy bit short of HiLo's performance, but you can outgrow that limitation later. No matter how you're using the system, Red-7's natural pivot can be helpful for a back-counter, and you may come to appreciate it if that's your style.

Once you've pulled some table time, you can start learning true-count Red-7. In this mode, Red-7 can be quite a beast, being significantly easier than a full level II count while delivering substantially more power than HiLo (Red-7 actually beats HiLo by all the standard metrics of count performance). The cool part of this is that the indices are easy to port directly from HiLo: just shift them all down by 2. You will need new betting ramps when you do this, but those aren't really troublesome.

Try not to put too much stock in the eternal debate over 'WHAT COUNT SHOULD I USE?!?'. The best count is the one you're comfortable with. Red-7 is strong to begin with and can be made even stronger. It will not steer you wrong.

Enjoy your time here, and learn something.

**zengrifter** · 03-04-2013, 09:30 PM

User is banned, content deleted.

**Frostbyte** · 03-04-2013, 09:48 PM

Originally Posted by zengrifter

Agreed. R7 can be the total evolution: from simple level-1 RC system with the same power as Hilo, to a full-fledged level-2 TC with the relative power of ZEN and RPC, without ever changing counts. The best possible choice for any new entrant. That or Renzey's KISS3.

Efficiency calc suggests KISS3 might perform ever so slightly better in DD as it gains ~.02 playing efficiency at the expense of .01 BC relative to Red-7.

The difference for most people would probably add up to the price of an uncomped dinner in a casino steakhouse... over ten years of play.

**mofungoo** · 03-05-2013, 07:59 AM

The unbalanced counts are very good for shoe games especially when you are just starting to count. What you are doing by using an unbalanced count is not cheating - it's a wise choice, IMO.

**First Normal Form** · 03-05-2013, 08:34 AM

CVCX Online, 6 decks / 1.25 cutoff, H17 DAS, 1-16

Red7 Advanced, Shoes: 25.43
HiLo Full: 29.61 (+16%)

So there's a large difference in power simply by going to true-counted HiLo, let alone a multi-level count. Your cheating costs you 14%. However, I don't mean to dissuade you. You've picked a decent count. You can avoid all those deck estimation headaches for 14%. I wholeheartedly agree with ZG that unbalanced counts offer a pleasant improvement curve, "cradle-to-grave" aspect.

**Frostbyte** · 03-05-2013, 12:16 PM

Originally Posted by First Normal Form

CVCX Online, 6 decks / 1.25 cutoff, H17 DAS, 1-16

Red7 Advanced, Shoes: 25.43
HiLo Full: 29.61 (+16%)

So there's a large difference in power simply by going to true-counted HiLo, let alone a multi-level count. Your cheating costs you 14%. However, I don't mean to dissuade you. You've picked a decent count. You can avoid all those deck estimation headaches for 14%. I wholeheartedly agree with ZG that unbalanced counts offer a pleasant improvement curve, "cradle-to-grave" aspect.

What is the relative gain of Red-7 TC over HiLo assuming full indices for both? I've heard various figures quoted. I don't use full indices at present but am likely to change that.

**zengrifter** · 03-05-2013, 12:32 PM

User is banned, content deleted.

**Frostbyte** · 03-05-2013, 12:37 PM

Originally Posted by zengrifter

I think that R7 should have trumped HiLo in that environ.

See also -

Battle of the Babies: A Comparison of the Red 7, Hi-Lo, and KO Card Counting Systems

FNF's post refers to a lack of deck estimation. Would one still except RC Red-7 to trump HiLo?

**zengrifter** · 03-05-2013, 12:43 PM

User is banned, content deleted.

**NT21** · 03-05-2013, 01:24 PM

Originally Posted by KC_APS

NT advocates H/L of course, but I can't help feeling Red7 would be as effective in shoe games realistically

Actually, KC, I don't advocate for Hi-Lo. It's just the count that I use and reference in my book. I agree with the other posters who say that it's more important to find a count that suits you.

**zengrifter** · 03-05-2013, 02:26 PM

User is banned, content deleted.

**KC_APS** · 03-05-2013, 04:42 PM

Excellent - thank you so much all! It seems, as I concluded from my reading as well, that you all advocate to go with what's right for yourself and your AP style. I think red7 it is - I like the potential development of the count to a quasi TC style / level 2 count as well. I also thought the decision to stick with one style of game (shoes) - and stick with it makes it an easier choice.

One other question I had - I see on forums people talk about cross referencing the I18 for example with an unbalanced count. Is there a significant advantage to this kind of hybrid approach? Sounds like a CVDATA purchase is needed, I know, I know! Just trying to develop the game plan, so to speak. Perhaps I've deviating from the KISS thought process but thought I'd ask.

Thanks for your perspective as well NT21, along with everyone!

If anyone has any other opinions / interesting comparison links please feel free. Like a sponge here.