I have a friend who is about to start using the Revere Point Count system and I am just wondering how will that system stack up against KO, Hi-Lo, or some of the other systems? What is its strengths and weakness? Any opinions are appreciated. Thanks.
> I have a friend who is about to start using
> the Revere Point Count system and I am just
> wondering how will that system stack up
> against KO, Hi-Lo, or some of the other
> systems? What is its strengths and weakness?
> Any opinions are appreciated. Thanks.
I've used the RPC for my entire 28-year counting career. It is particularly suitable for shoe games where large bet spreads are employed. For such games, if you look at the SCORE chapter of BJA3, you'll see that the RPC outperforms K-O and hi-lo by about 8-12%, depending on various rules and conditions.
Of course, the RPC is not the strongest of all the counts, but with its relative ease of learning, it's right up there when both are taken into account.
Don
> I've used the RPC for my entire 28-year
> counting career. It is particularly suitable
> for shoe games where large bet spreads are
> employed. For such games, if you look at the
> SCORE chapter of BJA3, you'll see that the
> RPC outperforms K-O and hi-lo by about
> 8-12%, depending on various rules and
> conditions.
> Of course, the RPC is not the strongest of
> all the counts, but with its relative ease
> of learning, it's right up there when both
> are taken into account.
> Don
Don,
Thanks for the reply. I may borrow my friends Revere book and check it out. My friend also mentioned that Revere has a plus minus count that is like hi-lo. What do you think of this system in comparison to the RPC? From what my friend told me about this level one from Revere, I think that regular hi-lo is better but not up against the RPC. What is your view?
I certainly agree with you, but according to XXXM software-sims KO out performs the RPC under typical(H17) strip rules,huh,is this some kind of bug!? Should I add 8-12% of win rate to the RPC for the correct answers using this software or subtract this winrate from KO?
thanks,
Brick
> Thanks for the reply. I may borrow my
> friend's Revere book and check it out. My
> friend also mentioned that Revere has a plus
> minus count that is like hi-lo.
It isn't "like hi-lo"; it IS hi-lo! They're the same thing.
> What do you
> think of this system in comparison to the
> RPC? From what my friend told me about this
> level one from Revere, I think that regular
> hi-lo is better but not up against the RPC.
> What is your view?
Again, the Revere plus-minus IS hi-lo. So, yes, the RPC will outperform the level-one count under all circumstances.
Don
> I certainly agree with you, but according to
> XXXM software-sims KO out performs the RPC
> under typical(H17) strip rules,huh,is this
> some kind of bug!?
See BJA3, Table 9.16, p. 169, where, for a 39/52, h17, d10 game with a 1-2 spread, hi-lo ( but not K-O) outperforms the RPC by ten cents! You have to really look hard to find situations where hi-lo will beat the RPC. The moment the slightest spread is employed (including this game with 1-3), the RPC starts pulling away very quickly.
I can't think of any situation whatsoever where K-O would outperform the RPC.
> Should I add 8-12% of win
> rate to the RPC for the correct answers
> using this software or subtract this win rate
> from KO?
I have no idea. Might be better to get reliable software. You don't have CV??
Don
> I have no idea. Might be better to get
> reliable software. You don't have CV??
I dont have CV. I'm using BJRM,which is supposed to be(according to this BJ site)reliable. I'm a bit disturbed and now questioning it's true accuracy. There is also a few other minor nuisances,other than that it's fine. You dont have BJRM!?
Brick
> See BJA3, Table 9.16, p. 169, where, for a
> 39/52, h17, d10 game with a 1-2 spread,
> hi-lo ( but not K-O) outperforms the RPC by
> ten cents! You have to really look hard to
> find situations where hi-lo will beat the
> RPC. The moment the slightest spread is
> employed (including this game with 1-3), the
> RPC starts pulling away very quickly.
> I can't think of any situation whatsoever
> where K-O would outperform the RPC.
> I have no idea. Might be better to get
> reliable software. You don't have CV??
> Don
> I dont have CV. I'm using BJRM,which is
> supposed to be(according to this BJ
> site)reliable.
It's very reliable. I don't understand the problem.
> I'm a bit disturbed and now
> questioning its true accuracy. There is
> also a few other minor nuisances, other than
> that it's fine.
Tell us specific problems.
>You dont have BJRM!?
That's a joke, right? It's mentioned on half the pages of BJA3. :-)
Don
Use strip rules (6D,h17,das,75%) and compare KO to RPC, you'll see the results. To my amazement KO outperforms the RPC and flirts with multilevel count systems.
> Use strip rules (6D,h17,das,75%) and compare
> KO to RPC, you'll see the results. To my
> amazement KO outperforms the RPC and flirts
> with multilevel count systems.
My memory certainly isn't the most reliable thing in the world, but I vaguely recall something from the days when I used KO regarding the sims in BJRM2000 having been done with a true-counted version of KO.
I may be totally off-base on this (wouldn't be the first time :-)), but a true-counted KO is among the most powerful level one counts.
Perhaps John Auston will jump in and clarify.
> Use strip rules (6D,h17,das,75%) and compare
> KO to RPC, you'll see the results. To my
> amazement KO outperforms the RPC and flirts
> with multilevel count systems.
I guess there's something about a pathetic game, with a horrible SCORE, that makes it a "great equalizer," among systems. I checked with both CVCX and BJRM 2002, and K-O holds its own against RPC, Zen, and hi-lo, for this game (I used play-all, 1-12 and 1-16 spreads).
Then, I switched to s17, das, ls, back-counting, with a 1-12 spread, and K-O was dead last among RPC, Zen, and hi-lo, which outperformed it by clear margins, in the order given.
Don
As you can now see, somthings up,a real eye opener(:
> I guess there's something about a pathetic
> game, with a horrible SCORE, that makes it a
> "great equalizer," among systems.
It's very difficult for me to believe by simply changing rules to H17 is the reason KO keeps up with the best counting systems in the world. Sorry Don but I dont buy your reasoning of a pathetic game and KO being a "great equalizer".
A KO bug in sims perhaps or the possibilty of biased betting of frequencies is more in line. Parker brought up a good point about the possibility of TKO being used. If this is the case then BJRM should have listed TKO as the count being used and not KO. This is misleading and could have negligent results for serious card counters who use BJRM when dealing with optimal bets,ev and risk of ruin. Fortunately,I doubt many serious card counters who bet big money use KO. If BJRM does use TKO then John Austin should have came forth and made a public note of it to players who have purchased this product.
I hope disagreeing with you is not against Parker's policies. I feel this is an important post and should be accepted for the BJ community.
Brick
> I checked with both CVCX and BJRM 2002, and
> K-O holds its own against RPC, Zen, and
> hi-lo, for this game (I used play-all, 1-12
> and 1-16 spreads).
> Then, I switched to s17, das, ls,
> back-counting, with a 1-12 spread, and K-O
> was dead last among RPC, Zen, and hi-lo,
> which outperformed it by clear margins, in
> the order given.
> Don
> It's very difficult for me to believe by
> simply changing rules to H17 is the reason
> KO keeps up with the best counting systems
> in the world. Sorry Don but I dont buy your
> reasoning of a pathetic game and KO being a
> "great equalizer".
I'm not asking you to "buy it"; I'm simply telling you that it's the case. In order to "display" their superiority, if you will, card-counting systems need an opportunity to "perform." If you strip them of that opportunity, by providing games with SCOREs of $12.50, or even $25, all the systems start to look alike. So, I'm not surprised if, under the game conditions you mentioned, K-O gives the illusion of "holding its own" against the more powerful systems. In many, many other cases (see the SCORE chapter of BJA3), that simply will NOT be the case.
> A KO bug in sims perhaps or the possibilty
> of biased betting of frequencies is more in
> line.
Nope. John's work and Norm's CVCX give virtually identical results. There is nothing wrong with the sims.
> Parker brought up a good point about
> the possibility of TKO being used. If this
> is the case then BJRM should have listed TKO
> as the count being used and not KO.
It's not listed as TKO, because it's not TKO! It's K-O Preferred, and it says so, right in the middle of the BJRM display.
> This is
> misleading and could have negligent results
> for serious card counters who use BJRM when
> dealing with optimal bets, ev and risk of
> ruin.
See above. John accepts your apology! :-)
> Fortunately,I doubt many serious card
> counters who bet big money use KO. If BJRM
> does use TKO then John Austin should have
> came forth and made a public note of it to
> players who have purchased this product.
Beating a dead horse. See above.
> I hope disagreeing with you is not against
> Parker's policies. I feel this is an
> important post and should be accepted for
> the BJ community.
Disagreeing with me is not against Parker's policies. Neither is being wrong in what you're asserting! :-)
Don
Posting Permissions
-*-
Bookmarks