YaleMoto: Upgrading KO to Unbalanced Halves

[YaleMoto]

Considering the interest in the previous post regarding upgrading hi-lo, I am presenting and seeking comment regarding my upgrade to KO - the unbalanced halves count, which has the same tags as KO except 5 = 1.5 and 7 = .5. The pivot point of this system - like KO - is TC of +4 (which I prefer over a pivot at TC of +2 because it allows for more index plays near pivot). This system should have about the same playing and insurance efficiency as KO, but a better betting efficiency of about .99 - similar to Stanford Wong's halves and the Uston SS.

I have been playing this system in double deck games recently with the full KO matrix and skewing the key count based on penetration. It is somewhat more fatiguing than KO because of the halves count, but it is easy to switch back to KO when fatigued with this system.

I believe this system should perform similar to, if not better than, Uston SS and Unbalanced Zen in today's two and six deck games - where betting efficiency is most important.

Comments or simulation data from Norm, Don, or Cacarulo on this system would be appreciated.

Norm, what happened to KO simulation data on the qfit calculator (a wonderful bj tool); I can't find it anymore?

[AutomaticMonkey]

It's an interesting approach, but the halves counting might defeat the purpose of using a system that's supposed to be extremely simple.

Another eccentric relative of Halves is the BRH-1 count which uses tags of {-2,1,2,2,3,2,1,0,0,-2}. The BC is very high and the pivot right around 0 (for IRC= -4* number of decks) which also results in a lot of useful index plays, especially in a LS game. My favorite feature of it is the linearity of the advantage, such that the spread can be expressed as Units Bet= RC+X, where X is an offset based on rules. E.g., for 6D, S17, LS, DAS the offset is +8, add RSA and it becomes +9, etc. I've worked out a set of playing indices and betting ramp data that I can share if you would like.

[Cacarulo]

Question: Are you playing that system in RC or TC mode?

Sincerely,
Cac

[YaleMoto]

> Question: Are you playing that system in RC or TC
> mode?

> Sincerely,
> Cac

RC mode with adjustments in the key count based on penetration.

[Cacarulo]

> RC mode with adjustments in the key count based on
> penetration.

The system in RC mode performs very similar to UBZII but then you are comparing a level-3 system to a level-2. Also, I would say that for spreads bigger than 12:1 it outperforms UBZII. If it is not difficult for you then go ahead and continue playing with it.
One last thing regarding efficiencies is that when you say that a system has a BC of 0.99 you are always referring to the True-Counted version.

Hope this helps.

Sincerely,
Cac

[YaleMoto]

> I would say that for spreads bigger
> than 12:1 it outperforms UBZII. If it is not difficult
> for you then go ahead and continue playing with it.

> Hope this helps.

It does help. Thank you very much Cac.

[shep]

skewing the key count based on penetration

I read this on the Upgrading KO to Unbalanced Halves post. I am new to gambling, and trying to learn the ropes. I started with Hi-Lo and recently switched to KO-P because of ease of use in casino environment. I have read several books, but none have said how to change the key count based on penetration. Only, get good penetration or don't play.

Recources and/or general advice would be appreciated.