Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 51

Thread: Norm Wattenberger: reKO revisited

  1. #1
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: reKO revisited


    Cacarulo came up with a better index list for the reKO count. I also developed a double deck version. After running a few hundred billion hands, I've "finalized" the definition. That is unless someone has some new ideas. Overall, reKO has 99.5%, give or take depending on circumstances, the power of KO Preferred. There was no cheating in the performance tests. KO Preferred is played as defined with optimal betting. Comparing a strategy to a crippled version of a standard strategy simply makes no sense. The indexes are the same for DD and six decks. All indexes are +2. For more info and performance data see:



  2. #2
    MJ
    Guest

    MJ: Are you going to add REKO to CVCX? *NM*


  3. #3
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: Once I'm sure there are no further changes *NM*


  4. #4
    MJ
    Guest

    MJ: What if you figured out the index values for splitting 10s vs 5 and 6....

    and then added just 2 more index numbers to REKO. That might enhance SCORE to the point where REKO clearly outperforms KO or even Hi-Lo! What do you think about that idea?

    I realize that you only want to use 1 index value for simplicity, but an extra 2 indexes can't hurt. Beside, Hi-Lo uses 10 splits so why not level the playing field?

    MJ

  5. #5
    MJ
    Guest

    MJ: Re: Once I'm sure there are no further changes

    Another question, does REKO use KO generic basic strategy or BS designed specifically for the 6 deck game?

    You might want to even use a single compromise index for the 10 splits like +5 if an extra 2 indexes seem like too much to remember. So, this way there are only a total of 2 indexes for the entire system. Certainly, this idea should help REKO outperform its counterpart. Again, you would have to figure out the optimal compromise index via simulation (+5 is just my educated guess). Sooner or later people will ask you how to
    enhance REKO. Adding one extra index can't hurt!

    10s vs 5 +5 split
    10s vs 6 +5 split

    MJ

  6. #6
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: Re: Once I'm sure there are no further changes

    > Another question, does REKO use KO generic basic
    > strategy or BS designed specifically for the 6 deck
    > game?

    I used the correct DAS strategy for both KO and reKO sims. The KO book provides a generic BS; but it also has the DAS changes in a footnote on another page. Most readers probably miss it.

    > You might want to even use a single compromise index
    > for the 10 splits like +5 if an extra 2 indexes seem
    > like too much to remember....

    The point is to start with an easy strategy that provides good results. The user can add or change indexes later. Splitting Tens with the correct index should add significantly.

  7. #7
    MJ
    Guest

    MJ: Re: Once I'm sure there are no further changes

    > The point is to start with an easy strategy that
    > provides good results. The user can add or change
    > indexes later.

    Might as well just include the 10 splits from the get go. What harm is the addition of 2 more index plays? If anything, it will make REKO more popular if it can outperform Hi-Lo, even just barely. Even better, REKO would still be waaaaayyyyy simpler then Hi-Lo or KO-Preferred.

    >Splitting Tens with the correct index should add >significantly.

    The question is by how much? You may want to run a quick simulation to find the compromise index for the 10 splits and then chart the "new REKO" vs KO Preferred and Hi-Lo. If the 10 splits do not add anything then don't bother including them. But if they do enhance the power of the system, then people will want them incorporated (I know I would). Its up to you.

    MJ


  8. #8
    Parker
    Guest

    Parker: Splitting 10's

    > You might want to even use a single compromise index
    > for the 10 splits like +5 if an extra 2 indexes seem
    > like too much to remember. So, this way there are only
    > a total of 2 indexes for the entire system. Certainly,
    > this idea should help REKO outperform its counterpart.
    > Again, you would have to figure out the optimal
    > compromise index via simulation (+5 is just my
    > educated guess). Sooner or later people will ask you
    > how to
    > enhance REKO. Adding one extra index can't hurt!

    > 10s vs 5 +5 split
    > 10s vs 6 +5 split

    Funny how, when something really really simple that works is developed, people immediately start looking for ways to make it more complicated (This is intended as a general comment on the human condition - don't take it personally).

    Since this system would appeal primarily to casual players, I don't think splitting 10's should be included. Casual players usually do not split 10's anyway, not because they are worried about heat, but simply because they are reluctant to break up a likely winning hand.

  9. #9
    MJ
    Guest

    MJ: Re: Splitting 10's

    > Funny how, when something really really simple that
    > works is developed, people immediately start looking
    > for ways to make it more complicated.

    Not trying to make it more complicated, just more POWERFUL.
    The added gain would probably more then outweigh the complexity.

    > Since this system would appeal primarily to casual
    > players, I don't think splitting 10's should be
    > included.

    If REKO can outperform Hi-Lo then casual players and professional players would use it.

    If 2 extra index plays can substantially enhance the power of the system by using only one more index value, then why not? I think Fuchs and Vancura made a severe mistake by not including the 10 splits as part of KO. They should have included them and leave it up to the user to decide for himself whether or not to incorporate them. Furthermore, if adding those plays allows for REKO to outperform Hi-Lo then that is a major plus for the system.

    Another point worth mentioning is that KO-P uses 2 index values anyhow for the 6 deck game...the key count and the pivot point. So, if Norm incorporates the compromise index for the 10 splits then that would still leave 2 index values. Even better the system would be more powerful!

    MJ

  10. #10
    AutomaticMonkey
    Guest

    AutomaticMonkey: Re: Once I'm sure there are no further changes

    > I used the correct DAS strategy for both KO and reKO
    > sims. The KO book provides a generic BS; but it also
    > has the DAS changes in a footnote on another page.
    > Most readers probably miss it.

    > The point is to start with an easy strategy that
    > provides good results. The user can add or change
    > indexes later. Splitting Tens with the correct index
    > should add significantly.

    For system for a beginner, splitting 10's adds a lot of variance, maybe too much. The other one that strikes me as possibly better off deleted is DD 10 vs. X, and to a lesser degree, DD 9 v. 7.

    Also I notice 12 vs. 4 is on the index list. You play regular BS at low counts and the index plays after the trigger point; you're not supposed to start hitting 12 vs. 4 at high counts, are you?


  11. #11
    Francis Salmon
    Guest

    Francis Salmon: About fairness of comparison

    "For fairness, all SCOREs were calculated using optimal betting ramps calculated for each penetration"

    Do you mean that it's the computer who is actually calculating the bet size according to the real edge?
    If that's really the case, it's anything but fair.
    Every system has it's recommanded betting scheme and we all know that the bet ramp is by far the most important factor regarding the efficiency of a system.(Even an index-perfectionist like me admits that:-)).
    Your comparison only shows that using a cleverly chosen unique index is just as good as the KO Preferred index system. This is not really surprising since any index system based on running count can only be rudimentary.
    But in order to compare the real efficiency of systems, we have to do it with the betting schemes as they are actually being recommanded and used.

    Francis Salmon

  12. #12
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: Re: About fairness of comparison

    > But in order to compare the real efficiency of
    > systems, we have to do it with the betting schemes as
    > they are actually being recommanded and used.

    The point of using optimal bets at every point when comparing two strategies is to level out the fact that at any exact set of circumstances one strategy will unfairly be at a disadvantage. And to preclude the possibility of rigging the results (as most books do.) If I used my suggested ramps against the book's, I'd definitely come out ahead because I know what penetrations and rules I'm looking at. Once you have first examined the strategy using optimal ramps; then you can look at suggested ramps.

  13. #13
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: Re: Once I'm sure there are no further changes

    Adding the two Ten splits at +7 would add a healthy 5-7%. But, that's not something I like to suggest to casual users.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

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.