Any tips to really nail down deck estimation?

[DatabaseGuy]

A good way to adjust is when the dealer pulls the remainder of the cards and puts them in the discard tray before feeding the ASM.

A quick look will show you how high the stack of 6 cards go. I often will look at where the half mark is and use some visual cue from the table.

If the deck could visibly hold 7 decks, I will be able to tell if the stack goes up to about 6/7th of the tray and then use 7th of increments.

Deck estimation is to help you truncate to TC. If the RC is 8 and the deck is "3-ish" then your TC is 2. If it is close to 3.5 then the TC is 3.

My humble opinion is that erring on the side of caution will give you mileage and reduce your RoR, although you may be missing opportunities.

[bjanalyst]

A good way to adjust is when the dealer pulls the remainder of the cards and puts them in the discard tray before feeding the ASM.

You are still fixating on balanced counts where you need accurate estimation of decks remaining for the true count calculation.

Use KO with TCRC. You have extremely accurate true counts of 3, 4, 5 and 6 and true counts of 4 are exact. Estimating to the nearest deck with KO and TCRC for true counts of 3, 4, 5 and 6 is the same as estimating to the nearest quarter deck for a balance count like the HL.

Also just mentally look up the true count from the TCRC which has a very easy pattern which makes remembering the TCRC very easy.

For n = 6 decks
For tc(KO) = 2, KO = 14, 16, 18, 20, 22 for dp (decks played) = 1, 2, 3, 4 5 (KO increases by 2 for each dp)
For tc(KO) = 3, KO = 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 for dp = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (KO increases by one for each dp)
For tc(KO) = 4, KO = 24 everywhere in the shoe.
For tc(KO) = 5, KO = 27, 26, 25 for dp = 3, 4, 5 (KO decreases by one for each dp)
For tc(KO) = 6, KO = 30, 28, 26 for dp = 3, 4, 5 (KO decreases by two for each dp)

Note that as dp increases, KO converges to its pivot of a true count of 4 which is KO = 24 for all KO true counts.

This TCRC is extremely easy to remember and there is not even any division involved - just remember the TCRC and mentally "look up" the tc based on the KO count and an estimate of dp to the nearest deck.

I did not list KO count entries for tc(KO) = 5 or 6 for dp = 1 or 2 since you almost never get a tc = 5 or 6 in the first two decks so do not even bother learning them.

So for the shoe game, switch from HL to KO and use TCRC and HL indices. Done!

[DatabaseGuy]

Thank you but I tried KO and didn't like it.

I am not going to argue your count vs my count. I have adopted a count and keep perfecting it every day.

I realize now I made a mess of my post, due to being tired at the time I wrote it.

Understand that I look at the full stack of 6 decks (or 8) when they are in the tray.

I will use some visual cue from the table or the background sometimes to remember the 3 deck mark.

Casino deck shoe cards are usually not the same quality as your regular Bicycle playing cards, let alone magic trick cards. They will not stack as high.

Buying used cards from the gift shop or online is a good idea.

I hate when they come with the octogonal cut vs a big hole in the middle.

I practice with used casino cards, I just remember to not touch my face and to use purell when I am done.

[ummagumma]

I've been practicing using CVBJ for a couple hundred hours now, and one of the spots I just keep messing up is betting while the discard tray is in between decks (around 20 or 30 cards). Its frustrating that I continue to mess up after so much practice, and I'm really looking for a way to nail it down. I have 6 decks of numbered cards that I use in real life with a discard tray, but I'm wondering if that is the most effective way? Anything helps.

The best tip is simple. Practice. And preferably in real world conditions. Experience is a wonderful and vastly underestimated thing, particularly by the young.

[Dog Hand]

<snip>By the way, what is UBZ11?

bjanalyst,

That's Unbalanced Zen Two (the "11" is supposed to be "II" for Roman numeral 2): see

https://www.qfit.com/cardcounting/Unbalanced-Zen-2/

Hope this helps!

Dog Hand

[bjanalyst]

bjanalyst,

That's Unbalanced Zen Two (the "11" is supposed to be "II" for Roman numeral 2): see

https://www.qfit.com/cardcounting/Unbalanced-Zen-2/

Hope this helps!

Dog Hand

Thanks.

So Zen II is actual a level 2 count version of the KO count and I see the Ace is counted as -1 and Tens as -2 so the Ace is between being counted as zero and -2 like the Tens which is what makes it Zen.

I do not think many players will want to keep a level 2 count but thanks for the information anyhow.

[bjanalyst]

Thank you but I tried KO and didn't like it.

OK To each his own.

Good luck with estimating decks played and decks remaining and your true count calculations.

[bigplayer]

First four decks of a six deck or first 6 decks of an 8 deck shoe doesn't matter, just get it reasonably close. 2 decks or less in accuracy in deck estimation begins to really matter I switch from dividing by decks remaining to using multipliers to get a more accurate estimation at about 3 decks to go. It should be second nature what divisior or multiplier to use.

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk

[bjanalyst]

First four decks of a six deck or first 6 decks of an 8 deck shoe doesn't matter, just get it reasonably close. 2 decks or less in accuracy in deck estimation begins to really matter I switch from dividing by decks remaining to using multipliers to get a more accurate estimation at about 3 decks to go. It should be second nature what divisior or multiplier to use.

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk

Not sure whey everyone is fixated with the HL and refuse to switch to the KO. I guess it is habit and people are reluctant to switch from something they feel comfortable with. But the KO is much better for the shoe game than the HL.

Agree In the last two decks, the accuracy of the true count of betting and playing strategy variations is very important.

That means for a balanced count, you should be estimate decks to the nearest half or even quarter of a deck and do your division correctly to get an accurate true count. Any mistake in division of estimation of decks remaining will result in an inaccurate true count where the true count is most important.

So switch to KO. For the six deck game, when KO = 24 and for the eight deck game when KO = 32 then tc = 4 everywhere in the shoe and and is totally independent of decks played or decks remaining and there is no division or calculations involved. If KO = 4*n where n = # decks, then tc = 4 and place a big bet out. As simple as that.

For the HL to match the accuracy of the KO at a true count of 4 where the KO true count is exact and independent of decks played, you would need to know the exact number of cards left so you can get the exact decks remaining and then do the division of HL by exact decks remaining exactly and without any errors to get an exact HL true count to match the exact KO true count. Compare the HL work to get an exact tc = 4 with the KO where you just look and see if KO = 4*n where n = # of decks to know if you are at a true count of 4.

For the shoe game, use the KO. As I said for n = 6 decks, KO =24 is a tc = 4 everywhere in the shoe including at decks remaining = 2, 1.5, 1 and 0.5 decks where accuracy is most important.

[ferenc11]

Not sure whey everyone is fixated with the HL and refuse to switch to the KO. I guess it is habit and people are reluctant to switch from something they feel comfortable with. But the KO is much better for the shoe game than the HL.

Agree In the last two decks, the accuracy of the true count of betting and playing strategy variations is very important.

That means for a balanced count, you should be estimate decks to the nearest half or even quarter of a deck and do your division correctly to get an accurate true count. Any mistake in division of estimation of decks remaining will result in an inaccurate true count where the true count is most important.

So switch to KO. For the six deck game, when KO = 24 and for the eight deck game when KO = 32 then tc = 4 everywhere in the shoe and and is totally independent of decks played or decks remaining and there is no division or calculations involved. If KO = 4*n where n = # decks, then tc = 4 and place a big bet out. As simple as that.

For the HL to match the accuracy of the KO at a true count of 4 where the KO true count is exact and independent of decks played, you would need to know the exact number of cards left so you can get the exact decks remaining and then do the division of HL by exact decks remaining exactly and without any errors to get an exact HL true count to match the exact KO true count. Compare the HL work to get an exact tc = 4 with the KO where you just look and see if KO = 4*n where n = # of decks to know if you are at a true count of 4.

For the shoe game, use the KO. As I said for n = 6 decks, KO =24 is a tc = 4 everywhere in the shoe including at decks remaining = 2, 1.5, 1 and 0.5 decks where accuracy is most important.

By the way one word of caution with the KO count:
An unbalanced count is not accurate at the beginning or end of the shoe so you may overbet or underbet your advantage.
KO is most accurate in the middle of the shoe. It understates your edge early in the shoe, and overstates your edge near the end of the shoe. KO was designed so that the pivot (+4 RC) would represent an advantage of about 2% consistently, regardless of where you are in the shoe.

Unfortunately, the key count (the point where you first have a player advantage) isn't so consistent.



Sent from my M2004J19C using Tapatalk

[DSchles]

BJA3 is replete, in the SCORE chapter, with tables and charts comparing K-O to Hi-Lo. Skip all the rhetoric above, completely unsubstantiated, and just look at the unbiased results. Hi-Lo outperforms just about everywhere.

Don

[BoSox]

First four decks of a six deck or first 6 decks of an 8 deck shoe doesn't matter, just get it reasonably close. 2 decks or less in accuracy in deck estimation begins to really matter I switch from dividing by decks remaining to using multipliers to get a more accurate estimation at about 3 decks to go. It should be second nature what divisior or multiplier to use.

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by bjanalyst

"Not sure whey everyone is fixated with the HL and refuse to switch to the KO. I guess it is habit and people are reluctant to switch from something they feel comfortable with. But the KO is much better for the shoe game than the HL.

Agree In the last two decks, the accuracy of the true count of betting and playing strategy variations is very important.

That means for a balanced count, you should be estimate decks to the nearest half or even quarter of a deck and do your division correctly to get an accurate true count. Any mistake in division of estimation of decks remaining will result in an inaccurate true count where the true count is most important.

So switch to KO. For the six deck game, when KO = 24 and for the eight deck game when KO = 32 then tc = 4 everywhere in the shoe and and is totally independent of decks played or decks remaining and there is no division or calculations involved. If KO = 4*n where n = # decks, then tc = 4 and place a big bet out. As simple as that.

For the HL to match the accuracy of the KO at a true count of 4 where the KO true count is exact and independent of decks played, you would need to know the exact number of cards left so you can get the exact decks remaining and then do the division of HL by exact decks remaining exactly and without any errors to get an exact HL true count to match the exact KO true count. Compare the HL work to get an exact tc = 4 with the KO where you just look and see if KO = 4*n where n = # of decks to know if you are at a true count of 4.

For the shoe game, use the KO. As I said for n = 6 decks, KO =24 is a tc = 4 everywhere in the shoe including at decks remaining = 2, 1.5, 1 and 0.5 decks where accuracy is most important."


bjanalyst, forgive me if I am wrong, but, when reading your above quote it reads like you are giving lessons to bigplayer, the person that you quoted, instead of generalizing to others. Please take notice when doing this, especially when quoting extremely highly respected professional players, thank you.

[bjanalyst]

BJA3 is replete, in the SCORE chapter, with tables and charts comparing K-O to Hi-Lo. Skip all the rhetoric above, completely unsubstantiated, and just look at the unbiased results. Hi-Lo outperforms just about everywhere.

Don

In your comparison of HL with the KO did you use either the table of critical running counts or one of the true count KO formulas when you did your comparison? It is important that KO true counts be calculated correctly.

See attached PDF for details.
KO true count formulas.pdf