What is the Tarzan count that beats HO2 w ASC

[bjanalyst]

There are many threads here which discuss the Tarzan count to some degree. Some even display strategy charts for individual hands. Just do a search for "Tarzan".

As for the details of the system --- some here know, but none are authorized to tell you. Only Tarzan can do that.

Hi Gronbog

Thanks you very much for doing sims on both Tarzan count and my KO w 5m7c and AA89mTc.

I wanted to find out about the Tarzan count for two reasons

(1) How much stronger is it than the HO2 w ASC and how does it compare with the KO w 5m7c and AA89mTc.

(2) Is the Tarzan count easy to use.

I am attaching a three page PDF.

The first page of this PDF I put your sim results for HO2 w ASC, Tarzan bets count and my best KO w 5m7c and AA89mTc.
As you can see Tarzan betas KO w 5m7c and AA89mTc for play all but KO w 5m7c and AA89mTc beats Tarzan for back counting.

The second page of this PDF I showed that if you switch out 5m7c with 45m79c the CC increase and so the resulting system will be stronger. So KO w 45m79c and AA89mTc would beat Tarzan for back counting by an even greater degree than KO w 5m7c and AA89mTc does and would come closer to the Tarzan count for play all (and maybe even tie or beat it). This is based on CC which have proven to be very reliable in predicting all of the sim results you did for me. But I am not expecting and I am not asking you to do any sims on KO w 45m79c and AA89mTc. I am just making a point based on CCs.

The second page also shows an explanation of the Tarzan count with three buckets and a side count of Aces. I would never be able to do this. As I explained I do not like side counts of individual cards. They are APPROXIMATE as they require you to keep track of an ever increasing aces played for example, and then estimate decks played and then calculate Adef = 4*dp - Ap. Compare that to a balanced plus/minus side count which fluctuate around its mean of zero, do not involve and estimate of decks played and so are EXACT.

The third page is the accuracy of the KO count around it pivot of a true count of 4 where maximum bets are made.

The game I play has Lucky Ladies (which AA89mTc helps with) and Super 4 (which I use Am8c for). I use chips to keep these side counts. I update the KO in my head and the stack of AA89mTc chips as soon as the cards hit the table. I update Am8c after the cards are on the table. I can update all three counts faster than any dealer can deal and with chips I keep these counts accurately and can do this for hours on end without exhaustion. And I do my calculations easily and because of the pivot of a true count of 4, estimated decks to the nearest deck is more than adequate as I use my TCRC (Table of Critical Running Counts) to calculate "look up" the true count in my head instantly.

So if no side bets were offered, I would use 5m7c instead of Am8c. Or I could easily submits 45m79c for 5m7c if I wanted to . I would use 45m79c instead of 5m7c before I would switch to adding a third side count. But with chips, I could keep a third side count. My main problem with a third side count is that I run out of real estate to place my three stacks of chips and they sometimes bump into each other so I keep it at two side counts and two stacks of chips.

So again thanks for the sims and below it the three page PDF attached that I mentioned above.
Tarzan v HO2 w 5m7c & AA89mTc.pdf