Adding AA78mTc side count to High Low

**Three** · 02-08-2019, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by Gronbog

You also need to stop saying that KO is too difficult to simulate.i simulated your Hilo system because that's the one you asked me for.

I think what he means is he is afraid to find out the results of his KO system.

**Dbs6582** · 02-08-2019, 09:47 AM

Originally Posted by kwso

Mr. BJanalyst,
You cannot expect people to take your words for it without sim. You write you don’t need money and you give your winning away. Why don’t you use your winning to pay Mr. Gronbog to do the KO sim? If the sim proves you are right, you shut everybody up. Maybe you will sell a lot of books.

I disagree. I like what bjanalyst is doing with the winnings, giving it to Carla. I don’t know Carla but she sounds like a good person and someone who needs the money. If I remember right, I think she has three or four kids. I do agree that bjanalyst should probably bring more money when they play.

**bjanalyst** · 02-08-2019, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by Tarzan

False. I've heard of a guy that has in fact succeeded at this long ago, not very easy, not public, but it's certainly been done.

It was relatively meaningless to me for any comparison sake with not enough points of reference. I don't see your KOAA89mTc5m7c outperforming Hi-Opt2ASC.

When I gave Gronbog HL with AA78mTc and 5m6c indices and values of k1 and k2 which he entered into his sim program I have him Expected Value indices, not Risk Adjusted indices. I already posted a chart showing pa(t) = AACpTCp * (t - Idx) where pa(t) = player's advantage at t = tc(psrc) and RA indices should be chosen one or two or even three points higher than EV indices. If CC is large and AACpTCp is large then just increase EV by 1. If either CC is small and/or AACpTCp is small then increase EV index by 2 or 3 points. Norman said that SCORE is increased by using RA indices as opposed to EV indices. If I used RA indices with HL with AA78mTc and 5m6c then the SCORE would have most likely improved but I am sure would have still been below HL2 with ASC as HL with AA78mTc and 5m6c was never even a count combination I ever recommended. I made the mistake at looking at 5m6c helping with hard 16 v T hit/stand, the 2nd most important playing and thought let me see what happens. It turned out to be a disaster.

Deviations from Basic Strategy (1).jpg
Deviations from Basic Strategy (2).jpg
Deviations from Basic Strategy (3).jpg
Deviations from Basic Strategy (4).jpg
Deviations from Basic Strategy (5).jpg

**bjanalyst** · 02-08-2019, 02:30 PM

Originally Posted by Gronbog

You also need to stop saying that KO is too difficult to simulate.i simulated your Hilo system because that's the one you asked me for.

I didn't really mean too diffulct to simulate KO. By too difficult I really meant it was a lot of work to simulate my KO system. I did not want to further impose on you by asking you to simulate the KO system. You already did enough work with the HL system.

Readers do seem very interested in a sim of the KO system however.

But again it was really me not want to impose on you more than anything else.

If you are willing to simulate KO with AA89mTc and 5m7c then that would be GREAT!

So if you are willing to simulate my KO system please email me and we can discuss details.

Thank you again for the HL system simulations. You are the best!

**bjanalyst** · 02-08-2019, 02:51 PM

Originally Posted by Three

I think what he means is he is afraid to find out the results of his KO system.

I an not afraid at all with a sim run on my KO system! As I explained earlier it would be great if Gronborg could run a sim on my KO system!. The reason I did not want to ask Grinbog for a sim is that I did not want to impose on him.

My prediction is for the no LS game, which is what Gronbog simulates, is that I believe my KO system will beat the HO2 w ASC. My prediction for the LS game, which is not simulated, is that my KO system will definitely beat the HO2 w ASC.

If Gronbog does agree to simulate my KO system I will not use EV indices for doubles and splits - I will use my estimated RA indices where I increase the EV indices by 1, 2 or 3 depending on AACpTCp and CC of each particular double or split as I described in earlier posts.

**Three** · 02-08-2019, 03:37 PM

Gronbog can simulate anything. He is the best.

**seriousplayer** · 02-08-2019, 03:40 PM

Originally Posted by Norm

Of course there are superior systems. For example, Hi-Opt II ASC with multi-parameter tables. Or, Hi-Opt II for play and RPC for betting.

Also, the BRHII with secondary count combination to give BRHII/BRHI beats Hi-OPT II ASC. I simulated the BRHII/BRHI using running count and it did indeed outperform Hi-OPT II ASC. Not sure how it will perform if a 4 point secondary count is added to Hi-OPT II to give RPC.

**bjanalyst** · 02-08-2019, 06:21 PM

Originally Posted by Three

Gronbog can simulate anything. He is the best.

Agreed. Gronbog is the best. As I explained earlier, when I said simluating the KO system is difficult I did not mean that it could not be done and that Gronbog could not do it. Gronbog is extremely talented so of course he could do the sim of my KO system. As I also explained before, what I meant by difficult was hard - it would require a lot of work to set up the KO sims and I didn't want to impose on Gronbog who has arleady done a lot of work on my HL system sims. So I just want to make it clear that I never, ever intended my statement that simulating the KO sytem was difficult to mean that Gronbog coudl not simluate it. I would never insult Gronbog.

So if Gronbog is willing to simulate my KO system that would be PERFECT. Let's wait an see if Gronbog has the time and is willing to do the simulation.

**bjanalyst** · 02-08-2019, 06:49 PM

Originally Posted by Norm

Of course there are superior systems. For example, Hi-Opt II ASC with multi-parameter tables. Or, Hi-Opt II for play and RPC for betting.

Hi-Opt II for play and RPC for betting.

I am not sure what Norman meant by this statement. It sound to me like Norman simulated HO2 ASC for playing and used RPC for betting so he was simulating a player using two level 2 count systems where most of the ranks were counted in each system?

Anyhow attached are BC for both LS and no LS EoR for RPC, HO2 - 2*(Adef) and KO + (1/2)*(5m7c). It turns out the RPC has a lower BC than does HO2 - 2*(Adef) and KO + (1/2)*(5m7c). So why would you use RPC for betting when HO2 w ASC is better for betting than RPC. Am I missing something?
Betting RPC (1).jpg
Betting RPC (2).jpg

**seriousplayer** · 02-08-2019, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by bjanalyst

Hi-Opt II for play and RPC for betting.

Just done a new simulation myself to confirm that Hi-OPT II for play and RPC for betting outperform Hi-OPT II ASC. You don't need to know what it means, you just need to know.

**lij45o6** · 02-08-2019, 08:21 PM

Originally Posted by seriousplayer

Just done a new simulation myself to confirm that Hi-OPT II for play and RPC for betting outperform Hi-OPT II ASC. You don't need to know what it means, you just need to know.

No, no, no... what is needed is HOII *with* ASC, RPC, *AND* Ten count (for insurance)

You are now god of 21!

**Midwest Player** · 02-08-2019, 09:19 PM

Suggest he use the special count by Eliot Jacobson for the lucky ladies and KO for blackjack. His partner could do one count and he the other. Simple. End of story.
https://www.888casino.com/blog/side-...kjack-side-bet

**bjanalyst** · 02-08-2019, 11:50 PM

Originally Posted by dogman_1234

No, no, no... what is needed is HOII *with* ASC, RPC, *AND* Ten count (for insurance)

So you are suggested three level 2 counts and an Ace side count? The level 2 HO2 counts all ranks by 8, 9, A, the level 2 RPC counts all ranks but 8 and 9 ad the level 2 Ten count counts all ranks. That sounds crazy to me.