See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 1 of 16 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 198

Thread: For HL player who refuses to switch to KO use 5m9c as a side count to HL

  1. #1


    0 out of 3 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    For HL player who refuses to switch to KO use 5m9c as a side count to HL

    In a previous recent post, I showed that KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c is an immensely powerful count system that handily beat the HO2 w ASC for both LS and no LS and tied Tarzan for no LS.

    It should be noted that Gronbog said in an 08-02-2020 post “At the time, sims were run for some 6 deck games and the results were delivered to Tarzan. It's up to him whether these results will ever be published and in what form.”

    So, Tarzan’s count was run for the LS game, but Tarzan chose not to publish it. I published the results of every single simulation that Gronbog ran for me as I have nothing to hide and every single time the CC increased the SCORE increased. Makes you wonder why Tarzan did not post LS. Perhaps his system, besides being immensely complicated, is not versatile enough to handle various games. If I am given the EoR, my system can handle any game or side bet.

    At any rate, back to HL w 5m9c which will NOT beat HO2 w ASC or even come close.

    My goal here was never to beat HO2 w ASC. My goal here is to help the HL player, who will not switch to another system, keep the HL and improve it with a simple adjustment. So these HL players would never switch to another count system, especially not the complicated level two HO2 where an entire new set of indices also needs to be memorized, so that comparison of HL w 5m9c to HO2 w ASC is meaningless here. I will just improve the HL with a single adjustment which I predict below would tie the complicated level three Wong’s Halves.

    5m9c = Five minus Nine count = fives played minus nines played. The fives have a tag of +1 and the nines have a tag of -1.

    I have found that most players use the HL and refuse to learn or switch to anything else. So, for these players I recommend adding 5m9c as a simple level one side count to the HL, with both counts kept mentally.

    You can use chips for 5m9c side count but some players are hesitant to use chips thinking it may draw casino heat. One stack of chips is easy to hide and makes it look like you are just playing with your chips. I have never had any problem with using chips for my two side counts with the KO, AA89mTc and 5m9c. No one in the casino every bothered or questioned me. But the 5m9c is simple enough to keep mentally with the HL as you are just keeping two integers in your head if using chips is a concern for you. Easy to learn with practice and since 5m9c recognizes only two ranks, it is not updated that often.

    So an extra edge while keeping the HL can be obtained by keeping a simple level one side count, 5m9c.

    5m9c can be easily keep in your head with the HL count - you are just keeping two integers in your head.

    Update HL count as soon as the cards hit the table. After all cards are on the table but before players make their playing decision, scan for fives and nines seen and calculated 5m9s (s = seen) and add to 5m9c from previous round to get updated 5m9c. Then update 5m9c and HL as players continue to play out their hands.

    With a little practice keeping the 5m9c with the HL is extremely easy to do

    So, there is no way that HL with 5m9c will come close to the HO2 w ASC, but it will improve the HL, especially for betting, with extraordinarily little work.

    And near the end of the shoe, accurate betting is very important. Also, the strategy changes using 5m9c are few and quite easy to remember.

    So first let us look at the extra power you get by adding 5m9c to HL. WACC = weighted average CC and BCC = betting CC for the S17, DAS, LS game.

    HL...................WACC = 73.7%, BCC = 96.5%
    Wong’s Halves.. WACC = 75.8%, BCC = 99.3%
    HL w 5m9c.......WACC = 77.6%, BCC = 98.4%
    HO2 w ASC.......WACC = 85.8%, BCC = 97.9%

    So, HL w 5m9c has a greater BCC than HO2 w ASC but falls far behind HO2 w ASC in WACC and so will not come close to HO2 w ASC. The purpose of the 5m9c is for a simple improvement to HL, not to beat HO2 w ASC.

    HL w 5m9c increases HL BCC of 96.5% by 1.9% to get BCC = 98.4% but still falls short of Wong’s Halves BCC = 99.3% by 0.9%. However, HL w 5m9c WACC = 77.6% which beats Wong’s Halves WACC = 75.8% by a substantial 1.8%. But since betting efficiency is more important than playing efficiency for the shoe game, my prediction is that HL w 5m9c will perform approximately equal to Wong’s Halves.

    So, you get the power of Wong’s Halves while keeping the HL which will still be used for most playing strategy changes by simplify adding a 5m9c side count. So both the primary and side count are simple level one counts – no need to switch to a higher level system.

    It should be noted that 5m9c helps the HL with EVERY late surrender decision. For EVERY late surrender decision, simply add 5m9c to HL and use this (HL + 5m9c) as if it were the HL with the HL surrender indices. So for example, surrender hard 13 v T if HL >= 8*dr (dr = decks remaining) becomes surrender hard 13 v T if (HL + 5m9c) >= 8*dr. No new indices need to be learned.

    So here are the most important and simplified changes to the HL by adding the 5m9c.

    1. brc = betting running count = HL + (1/2)*(5m9c)
    2. Use HL + 5m9c with HL indices in place of HL for these strategy changes:
      1. Standing on hard 16 v 8, 9, T.
      2. Standing on hard 15 v T
      3. Doubling hard 9 v 7
      4. ALL surrender decisions.

    3. Stand on hard 16 v 7 if 5m9c >= 2.5*dr, If tc(HL) >= 4 then stand on hard 16 v 7 if 5m7c >= 2*dr where dr = decks remaining
    4. All other playing strategy decisions use the stand-alone HL and HL indices.


    And that is it. You now have a HL w 5m9c system that is on par with Wong’s Halves without keeping a higher-level count system. You get to keep the HL and all of the HL indices so there is very little extra to learn other than the few strategy changes I mentioned above where you use (HL + 5m9c) in place of HL and use HL indices for the strategy changes.
    Last edited by bjanalyst; 08-06-2020 at 09:15 AM.

  2. #2


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I make the following observations
    1. ASC alone to halves crushes your adjusted Hi Lo
    2. Use above for improved insurance, split, double - non double decisions
    3. Stand decisions 16 v 7 or 8 too infrequent to matter
    4. Doubling 9v7 not wise without more info. Use RA for split decisions instead
    5. 9 v 7 doubled requires FBM ASC advanced, and Jupiter needs to align with Mars

  3. #3


    0 out of 2 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by bjanalyst View Post
    In a previous recent post, I showed that KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c is an immensely powerful count system that handily beat the HO2 w ASC for both LS and no LS and tied Tarzan for no LS.

    It should be noted that Gronbog said in an 08-02-2020 post “At the time, sims were run for some 6 deck games and the results were delivered to Tarzan. It's up to him whether these results will ever be published and in what form.”

    So, Tarzan’s count was run for the LS game, but Tarzan chose not to publish it. I published the results of every single simulation that Gronbog ran for me as I have nothing to hide and every single time the CC increased the SCORE increased. Makes you wonder why Tarzan did not post LS. Perhaps his system, besides being immensely complicated, is not versatile enough to handle various games. If I am given the EoR, my system can handle any game or side bet.

    At any rate, back to HL w 5m9c which will NOT beat HO2 w ASC or even come close.

    My goal here was never to beat HO2 w ASC. My goal here is to help the HL player, who will not switch to another system, keep the HL and improve it with a simple adjustment. So these HL players would never switch to another count system, especially not the complicated level two HO2 where an entire new set of indices also needs to be memorized, so that comparison of HL w 5m9c to HO2 w ASC is meaningless here. I will just improve the HL with a single adjustment which I predict below would tie the complicated level three Wong’s Halves.

    5m9c = Five minus Nine count = fives played minus nines played. The fives have a tag of +1 and the nines have a tag of -1.

    I have found that most players use the HL and refuse to learn or switch to anything else. So, for these players I recommend adding 5m9c as a simple level one side count to the HL, with both counts kept mentally.

    You can use chips for 5m9c side count but some players are hesitant to use chips thinking it may draw casino heat. One stack of chips is easy to hide and makes it look like you are just playing with your chips. I have never had any problem with using chips for my two side counts with the KO, AA89mTc and 5m9c. No one in the casino every bothered or questioned me. But the 5m9c is simple enough to keep mentally with the HL as you are just keeping two integers in your head if using chips is a concern for you. Easy to learn with practice and since 5m9c recognizes only two ranks, it is not updated that often.

    So an extra edge while keeping the HL can be obtained by keeping a simple level one side count, 5m9c.

    5m9c can be easily keep in your head with the HL count - you are just keeping two integers in your head.

    Update HL count as soon as the cards hit the table. After all cards are on the table but before players make their playing decision, scan for fives and nines seen and calculated 5m9s (s = seen) and add to 5m9c from previous round to get updated 5m9c. Then update 5m9c and HL as players continue to play out their hands.

    With a little practice keeping the 5m9c with the HL is extremely easy to do

    So, there is no way that HL with 5m9c will come close to the HO2 w ASC, but it will improve the HL, especially for betting, with extraordinarily little work.

    And near the end of the shoe, accurate betting is very important. Also, the strategy changes using 5m9c are few and quite easy to remember.

    So first let us look at the extra power you get by adding 5m9c to HL. WACC = weighted average CC and BCC = betting CC for the S17, DAS, LS game.

    HL...................WACC = 73.7%, BCC = 96.5%
    Wong’s Halves.. WACC = 75.8%, BCC = 99.3%
    HL w 5m9c.......WACC = 77.6%, BCC = 98.4%
    HO2 w ASC.......WACC = 85.8%, BCC = 97.9%

    So, HL w 5m9c has a greater BCC than HO2 w ASC but falls far behind HO2 w ASC in WACC and so will not come close to HO2 w ASC. The purpose of the 5m9c is for a simple improvement to HL, not to beat HO2 w ASC.

    HL w 5m9c increases HL BCC of 96.5% by 1.9% to get BCC = 98.4% but still falls short of Wong’s Halves BCC = 99.3% by 0.9%. However, HL w 5m9c WACC = 77.6% which beats Wong’s Halves WACC = 75.8% by a substantial 1.8%. But since betting efficiency is more important than playing efficiency for the shoe game, my prediction is that HL w 5m9c will perform approximately equal to Wong’s Halves.

    So, you get the power of Wong’s Halves while keeping the HL which will still be used for most playing strategy changes by simplify adding a 5m9c side count. So both the primary and side count are simple level one counts – no need to switch to a higher level system.

    It should be noted that 5m9c helps the HL with EVERY late surrender decision. For EVERY late surrender decision, simply add 5m9c to HL and use this (HL + 5m9c) as if it were the HL with the HL surrender indices. So for example, surrender hard 13 v T if HL >= 8*dr (dr = decks remaining) becomes surrender hard 13 v T if (HL + 5m9c) >= 8*dr. No new indices need to be learned.

    So here are the most important and simplified changes to the HL by adding the 5m9c.

    1. brc = betting running count = HL + (1/2)*(5m9c)
    2. Use HL + 5m9c with HL indices in place of HL for these strategy changes:
      1. Standing on hard 16 v 8, 9, T.
      2. Standing on hard 15 v T
      3. Doubling hard 9 v 7
      4. ALL surrender decisions.

    3. Stand on hard 16 v 7 if 5m9c >= 2.5*dr, If tc(HL) >= 4 then stand on hard 16 v 7 if 5m7c >= 2*dr where dr = decks remaining
    4. All other playing strategy decisions use the stand-alone HL and HL indices.


    And that is it. You now have a HL w 5m9c system that is on par with Wong’s Halves without keeping a higher-level count system. You get to keep the HL and all of the HL indices so there is very little extra to learn other than the few strategy changes I mentioned above where you use (HL + 5m9c) in place of HL and use HL indices for the strategy changes.
    Impressive!!

  4. #4


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I'll stick with what we do.

  5. #5


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ShipTheCookies View Post
    I'll stick with what we do.
    Who is “we” and what dos thou doeth?

  6. #6


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeeBabar View Post
    Who is “we” and what dos thou doeth?
    He doeth the AP CSM advantage thing - he doth, he doth

  7. #7


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    "We" are a team and "we" do larger edges. And not just blackjack or table games.

  8. #8


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Don’t chase penny’s.

  9. #9


    0 out of 2 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Freightman View Post
    I make the following observations
    1. ASC alone to halves crushes your adjusted Hi Lo
    2. Use above for improved insurance, split, double - non double decisions
    3. Stand decisions 16 v 7 or 8 too infrequent to matter
    4. Doubling 9v7 not wise without more info. Use RA for split decisions instead
    5. 9 v 7 doubled requires FBM ASC advanced, and Jupiter needs to align with Mars
    I stated from the get go that my intention with using 5m9c with HL was just to improve the HL count with a minimal amount of extra work and effort.

    And I am sure your FBM system just like HO2 w ASC would beat HL with 5m9c but the HL player will never switch to these more complicated systems. They want to keep the HL so I just added a bandage to the HL to improve the HL, especially for betting which is most important in the shoe game.

    I specially said it would not come anywhere close to HO2 w ASC and I showed CC to support that.

    I said it is on par with Wong's Halves which is a difficult level 3 count.

    Another advantage is that you are using HL and all the HL indices so nothing new to learn and the HL player can continue to use the HL count.

    The betting adjustment is very simple and the few strategy changes using 5m9c with HL are very easy to remember.

    And yes, hard 16 v 7 and 8 hit/stand decisions to not occur that often but that is not the reason you were keeping the 5m9c count. You were keeping the 5m9c mainly to help the HL with betting efficiency. But since you have the 5m9c anyhow, why not use it for these plays hard 16 v 7 and hard 16 v 8.

    Standing on Hard 16 v 7 makes a big difference as basically almost the stand-alone 5m9c can be used. Stand on hard 16 v 7 if 5m9c >= 2.5*dr and if tc(HL) >= 4 then stand on hard 16 v 7 if 5m9c >= 2*dr where dr = decks remaining. The HL CC for this plays is around 26% or so so you would virtually never make this play using just the HL. The stand alone 5m9c for this play has a CC of 52%. If 5m9c is large there is a deficiency of five and an excess of nines. Thus there is a greater change of the dealer having a nine in the hole for a stiff 16 and a greater chance of you pulling a nice and busting. Also the deficiency of fives makes it less likely for you to pick up a five if you hit your hard 16 for a perfect 21. So the larger 5m9c is the more advantageous it is to stand on hard 16 v 7 than hit and the inflection point is when 5m9c >= 2.5*dr then stand. Although this play may not occur often, you might as well take advantage of it when it does, especially if you have a large bet out which you probably would. In addition it makes good cover if the casino sees you standing on hard 16 v 7 with your maximum bet out. The casino uses the HL to track you and they know with just the HL you should virtually always hit this hand.

    Finally, I was not getting into risk averse indices here. The expected value index of Doubling 9 v 7 is tc(HL) = 4 or using 5m9c, use tc(HL + 5m9c) = 4. What you should do is for all doubles and splits, increase all expected value doubting and splitting indices by one or two true count points. So double hard 9 v 7 if tc(HL) >= 6 instead of the expected value doubling of tc(HL) >= 4. But using 5m9c you get a more precise risk averse doubling of double hard 9 v 7 if tc(HL + 5m9c) >= 6.

    Again these plays are marginal and that is why HL WACC was increased from 73.7% to 77.6% when 5m9c was added to HL while WACC of HO2 w ASC is 85.8%. But you have that information in front of you so you might as well use it.

  10. #10


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by beating vegas View Post
    Don’t chase penny’s.
    Adding 5m9c helps the HL mainly with betting. The strategy change improvements are just extra frosting on the cake but that is not why you were keeping 5m9c.

    Near the end of the, precise betting is very important as a difference of just a few HL true count points with one deck left would make the difference between a minimum bet and a maximum bet.

    Also the 5m9c is a plus/minus count and is exact, unlike the ASC which depends on an estimate of decks played. You need an exact count for betting which is what brc = HL + (1/2)*(5m9c) is.

    For example, if dr = 1 and HL = 4 then tc(HL) = 4 and so you have a maximum bet out. But suppose 5m9c = (-8). Then brc = HL + (1/2)*(5m9c) = 4 + (1/2)*(-8) = 0. So you actually have your maximum bet out when the betting true count is zero and the casino has the edge.

    Or suppose dr = 1 and HL = 0 but 5m9c = 8, In this case you bet your minimum bet or actually stay out of the hand using just the HL count But HL + (1/2)*(5m9c) = 0 + (1/2)*8 = 4 for brc = 4 and since dr = 1 then btc (betting true count) = 4 and your maximum bet should be out.

    So there are two errors you can make with a low betting efficiency count. The first is betting when you should not be betting which was was the first case I mentioned above. The second is not betting when you should be betting which is the second case I mentioned above.

    In the shoe game betting is very important and these corrections to accurate betting do ad up. The example I gave near the end of the shoe was extreme. But you are making betting decisions on every blackjack hand. Improving your betting for every blackjack hand in all the shoes you play does adds up. It not only increases your expected value but also just as importantly reduces variance and risk and so you will have less losing sessions and more winning sessions.

    What I did was try to make the simplest adjustment possible to the HL with the biggest impact for the least amount of work. That is why I recommend 5m9c for the HL player. The player just needs to keep two integers in his head, HL and 5m9c, and can update the 5m9c after all cards are on the table and then again as the hands are finished played out for that round. Alternately a stack of chips can be used to keep the 5m9c side count in which case the player just needs to keep HL in his head with no extra mental work.

    So this is a very simple adjustment and improvement for the HL player who refuses to give up the HL count and still wants some simple and easy type of improvement.

    There is nothing wrong with the stand-alone HL with no side counts. The HL will get you the money and if you do not wish to do any extra work then just continue to use the HL.

    This suggesting was for those who want to keep the HL count and to improve the HL with the least effort possible. There are no new indices or count system to learn. You just keep the HL that you were always using and then just add a 5m9c side count mainly to help with betting but also helps with a few playing strategy decisions I mentioned above.
    Last edited by bjanalyst; 08-06-2020 at 07:50 PM.

  11. #11


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Freightman View Post
    I make the following observations
    1. ASC alone to halves crushes your adjusted Hi Lo
    2. Use above for improved insurance, split, double - non double decisions
    3. Stand decisions 16 v 7 or 8 too infrequent to matter
    4. Doubling 9v7 not wise without more info. Use RA for split decisions instead
    5. 9 v 7 doubled requires FBM ASC advanced, and Jupiter needs to align with Mars
    I did not analyze #1 above where you are adding an ASC to Wong's Halves.

    Probably does produce good results but that defeats my main goal here which was a simple adjustment to the HL to increase mainly betting efficiency for the HL player who does not want to switch to another count system.

    The Wong's Halves is very difficult level 3 count and an ASC is difficult and APPROXIMATE since it depends on estimating decks played whereas 5m9c is EXACT and independent of decks played and very easy to keep.

    These die hard HL players would never switch to Wong's Halves and I am sure would not want to keep an ASC either.

    If they want to improve the HL number one is they want to keep the HL count so you can eliminate Wong's Halves from consideration and they want a simple and exact side count like 5m9c, not a difficult approximate ASC.

    BCC has already improved from 96.5% to 98.4%, a 1.9% improvement using HL + (1/2)*(5m9c) for betting over the stand-alone HL for betting.

    And attached are the improvements in individual playing strategies I suggested using HL + 5m9c for these strategies instead of HL.

    I did not show hard 16 v 7 in the attached file as that strategy is just stand on hard 16 v 7 if 5m9c >= 2.5*dr or if tc(HL) >= 4 then stand if 5m9c >= 2*dr.

    I did make a small error in a previous post. The stand-alone HL for hard 16 v 7 has a CC of 37.1% (not 26% or so as I mentioned in a pervious post) and the stand-alone 5m9c has a CC of 52% and when used with HL (stand on hard 16 v 7 if tc(HL) >= 4 and 5m9c >= 2*dr) has a CC = 58%.

    Your other comments I have no doubt are correct but again, my purpose of include 5m9c was mainly to help with betting, not playing strategy variations. The extra playing strategy variations are just icing on the cake and since you are already keeping 5m9c why not use it for these playing strategy changes .

    Another change I did not mention was to split 7,7 v 8 DAS if 5m9c >= dr. This increases HL CC of 23% to 54% using stand-alone 5m9c for this play. But i did not mention it because it rarely happens.

    But to be complete attached are two PDFs. The first is the simplified strategy changes I mentioned and the second is the full strategy changes using 5m9c sorted by decreasing CC.
    HL w 5m9c simplified.pdf
    HL w 5m9c sorted.pdf

  12. #12


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    The forum owes an apology to T3...

  13. #13


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeeBabar View Post
    The forum owes an apology to T3...
    Zee, just for clarity, explain your thoughts. For the record, I agree with you. I gave him the gears big time because of his long winded posts. However, hidden in that verbosity, were several big time nuggets - some of which simply gave me another way of looking at things, others that I exploited big time.

    Also, for the record, while he was still participating, I sent him a note with a belated apology.

Page 1 of 16 12311 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Hi-Lo system with Ace side counts and 2, 3 side count
    By BJcountingmaster in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-27-2019, 06:25 PM
  2. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 08-16-2019, 11:38 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.