Red 7 count Vs. HI-lo ??

neemo6

Well-Known Member
#1
I was just reading about the red 7 system, and it seems pretty simple especially for a begginer since u dont have to convert to a true count and for insurance dont have to keep a seperate 10 count. Im currently practicing w/ the hi-lo system. I would like to hear from ppl using the red 7 count and how well it works out for them. Also how well does it compare in shoe game vs. the hi-lo. Thanx any info would be appreciated.
 
#2
If your good at HiLo then changing to red 7 should be an easy transition.
Mathematically speaking Red 7 is slightly more accurate than HiLo and I guess every little advantage helps.
 

KenSmith

Administrator
Staff member
#3
Did you get that backwards?

I haven't looked at comparative numbers between Red 7 and Hi-Lo lately, but I'll be amazed if Red 7 is more accurate. Any unbalanced count generally trades accuracy for simplicity.

Balanced counts offer a lot more flexibility with strategy variation, and that's the main value of switching from an unbalanced count to Hi-Lo.

For starting counters, an unbalanced count is a fine way to begin. I like KO better than Red 7, but IIRC the two are pretty close in ability. Once a player decides he or she will be playing more frequently, I'd advocate a switch to Hi-Lo.
 
#4
Red 7 v Hi-Lo

According to the creator of the Red 7 counting system , Arnold Snyder, “The easy Red Seven Count gets 80% of the potential gain available from the Hi-Lo Count and other counts that are significantly more difficult to learn and use. It is the strongest professional-level card-counting system ever devised for its level of simplicity and ease of use.”

Personally, if you plan on card counting only a few times a month for entertainment using a system like the Red 7, or as Ken mentioned the K-O, is a fine idea. But, if you plan on playing more, and you hope to truly supplement your current income go with the Hi-Lo. When you dive into a system like the Hi-Lo you are forced to learn a lot about the game of blackjack and this information will become useful down the road as there are situations that will present themselves that your overall knowledge of that game can exploit.
 

mino

New Member
#7
HI LO vs Red seven

well the hi-lo is better than the red 7 but ther is a advance red 7 system inwich you need to calculate the true edge or true count and its more accurate than the hi-lo. i use this system and its powerfull
 

Deathangl13

Well-Known Member
#8
neemo6 said:
I was just reading about the red 7 system, and it seems pretty simple especially for a begginer since u dont have to convert to a true count and for insurance dont have to keep a seperate 10 count. Im currently practicing w/ the hi-lo system. I would like to hear from ppl using the red 7 count and how well it works out for them. Also how well does it compare in shoe game vs. the hi-lo. Thanx any info would be appreciated.

Learn the KISS III count by Fred Renzey, they are very similar, but the KISS has three stages that you can learn and progress from beginner to advanced. I found the advanced easy enough to put to use rather quickly, and haven't looked back. His book is in my signature if you want to check it out. I promise you you will not need another BJ book....
 

sabre

Well-Known Member
#9
Deathangl13 said:

I promise you you will not need another BJ book....
That's an absurd comment. The book has some solid information in it, but to suggest that there aren't other extremely useful books out there is asinine.
 
#10
KenSmith said:
I haven't looked at comparative numbers between Red 7 and Hi-Lo lately, but I'll be amazed if Red 7 is more accurate. Any unbalanced count generally trades accuracy for simplicity.

Balanced counts offer a lot more flexibility with strategy variation, and that's the main value of switching from an unbalanced count to Hi-Lo.

For starting counters, an unbalanced count is a fine way to begin. I like KO better than Red 7, but IIRC the two are pretty close in ability. Once a player decides he or she will be playing more frequently, I'd advocate a switch to Hi-Lo.
Being the sums of the EOR of the ranks isn't zero and is slightly positive, an unbalanced count will give a better representation of them. And any unbalanced count can be true counted too. That's why Red 7 counting the 7 as 0.5 (similar to BRH-0) has better parameters even than KO.

In terms of real-world play a true counted system is often actually easier because you do everything the same in games from 4 to 8 decks. But with few exceptions there's not much benefit to true counting over an unbalanced count used properly, because of the fortuitous situation where most of the critical decisions happen right around the pivot point of the unbalanced count, where it is always completely accurate, and you don't have any added inaccuracies from deck estimation or true count rounding/truncating. Doubly fortutitous in that it's where we start getting the big bucks down on the table too!

In the unbalanced systems I use for pitch games the added accuracy from true counting ends up being less significant than the weight of a single card, so while it would gain some accuracy from true counting it would lose as much or more from rounding in the case of most indices. The major exceptions are the very negative indices. But it turns out the benefit of having insurance kick in at exactly the pivot point, with no mathematical errors added, is worth more than all those extreme negative indices combined.
 

QFIT

Well-Known Member
#11
Two probllems. First, OSR in not really accurate for unbalanced strategies. Secondly, in this chart, it is assumed that all Sevens are counted at .5. This makes it a more difficult level-II count which would indeed be more powerful. Only, it isn't how people use Red7.

mino said:
well the hi-lo is better than the red 7 but ther is a advance red 7 system inwich you need to calculate the true edge or true count and its more accurate than the hi-lo. i use this system and its powerfull
Sorry, Hi-Lo would be more accurate than using Red7 True Edge. If you actually true-counted Red7 with new indexes, that's another story.
 

Deathclutch

Well-Known Member
#12
Deathangl13 said:

Learn the KISS III count by Fred Renzey, they are very similar, but the KISS has three stages that you can learn and progress from beginner to advanced. I found the advanced easy enough to put to use rather quickly, and haven't looked back. His book is in my signature if you want to check it out. I promise you you will not need another BJ book....
Why does it seem that KISS III users usually sound like system pushers?
 

jack.jackson

Well-Known Member
#13
The OSR, in this example, uses a !:4 spread. If you notice the few systems, that has a lower BC, than OSR, it means the system loses ground in relation, to RoR, the more you start betting. The other sytems, where the BC, is higher than the OSR, means the system gets stronger the more you start betting. The OSR, will eventually MAX-OUT, equal to its systems BC at around 1:120 spread.

Take Zen for example. The OSR, gets weaker and weaker the more you start betting, b/c of its poor BC.

UstonSS overtakes Ao2, at around a 1:30 spread(OSR).


See Analyzer v3.5
http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/efficien/eff.htm (Archive copy)
 
Last edited:

Deathangl13

Well-Known Member
#14
sabre said:
but to suggest that there aren't other extremely useful books out there is asinine.
Didn't say there aren't other extremely useful books, but they don't contain info that isn't already addressed in BJBB II.... Again, just my opinion, I've found that most Blackjack books (unless some voodoo, or "cutting edge" strategy) are pretty repetitive, and he's probably not gonna find anything in any other book, that ISN'T in BJBB II. On the other hand, there is plenty of material in BJBB that is found nowhere else, at least not in the great detail it is presented with. I'm can't clearly remember if there is a Blackjack book, I haven't read, but if you name a few, It might come back to me....
 
#15
jack said:
The OSR, in this example, uses a !:4 spread. If you notice the few systems, that has a lower BC, than OSR, it means the system loses ground in relation, to RoR, the more you start betting. The other sytems, where the BC, is higher than the OSR, means the system gets stronger the more you start betting. The OSR, will eventually MAX-OUT, equal to its systems BC at around 1:120 spread.

Take Zen for example. The OSR, gets weaker and weaker the more you start betting, b/c of its poor BC.



UstonSS overtakes Ao2, at around a 1:30 spread(OSR).


See Analyzer v3.5
http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/efficien/eff.htm (Archive copy)

The playing efficiency numbers also aren't straightforward, being the indices important to a counter change with a spread. The powerful 16 vs. 10 play means very little to a guy using a big spread, because you're going to stand on that with anything more than a minimum bet down anyway. A counter can always stand on 16 vs. 10 and it won't make much difference in his results. And the ace becomes more like a high card in terms of play because of all those times he is doubling on 8, 9, 10, A8, and splitting 10's with huge bets down.
 

jack.jackson

Well-Known Member
#16
Automatic Monkey said:
The playing efficiency numbers also aren't straightforward, being the indices important to a counter change with a spread. The powerful 16 vs. 10 play means very little to a guy using a big spread, because you're going to stand on that with anything more than a minimum bet down anyway. A counter can always stand on 16 vs. 10 and it won't make much difference in his results. And the ace becomes more like a high card in terms of play because of all those times he is doubling on 8, 9, 10, A8, and splitting 10's with huge bets down.
I can only assume, you had the zen count in mind, when you posted this, since it only half-reckons the ace; diminishing the efficiency for those particular hands.

Now that I think about it, maybe zen isnt the ideal count to wong in with.

I always thought, this would be a ideal count to wong in with 2223210-1-2-3
 

jack.jackson

Well-Known Member
#17
Automatic Monkey said:
The playing efficiency numbers also aren't straightforward, being the indices important to a counter change with a spread. The powerful 16 vs. 10 play means very little to a guy using a big spread, because you're going to stand on that with anything more than a minimum bet down anyway. A counter can always stand on 16 vs. 10 and it won't make much difference in his results. And the ace becomes more like a high card in terms of play because of all those times he is doubling on 8, 9, 10, A8, and splitting 10's with huge bets down.
Say for example, you were using the ustonAPC, for multiple-deck. Wouldnt you get the best bang for your buck, by sticking to low spreads? In other words, shouldnt a system with high pe's, be kept to low(er) spreads, for optimal RoR?
 

Homeschool

Well-Known Member
#18
well the hi-lo is better than the red 7 but ther is a advance red 7 system inwich you need to calculate the true edge or true count and its more accurate than the hi-lo. i use this system and its powerfull
As far as I remember Snyder presents the "true edge" method as a way of estimating advantage only. Advanced Red-7 does not need the true edge method to be used, it only needs to be in the second half of the shoe.

Correct me if I'm wrong as I do not have my books in front of me at the moment.

Homeschool
 
#19
Red 7

neemo6 said:
I was just reading about the red 7 system, and it seems pretty simple especially for a begginer since u dont have to convert to a true count and for insurance dont have to keep a seperate 10 count. Im currently practicing w/ the hi-lo system. I would like to hear from ppl using the red 7 count and how well it works out for them. Also how well does it compare in shoe game vs. the hi-lo. Thanx any info would be appreciated.
I used to play the Red 7 exclusively at Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun. It's strong point is in big shoe games with a little movement around +1 to -1 like their 8 deck games. It specializes games that tend to have a very small advantage when it does have one and then capitalizing on that small advantage.

Now that I don't play those games anymore I moved to a different system

JoerBlack
 
#20
jack said:
I can only assume, you had the zen count in mind, when you posted this, since it only half-reckons the ace; diminishing the efficiency for those particular hands.

Now that I think about it, maybe zen isnt the ideal count to wong in with.

I always thought, this would be a ideal count to wong in with 2223210-1-2-3
Not that. The best playing efficiency is {A-10} is {-1,1,2,3,3,3,2,0,-1,-3} for a Wonger. For betting RPC is about as good as you can get. I don't use Zen specifically because of the lower BC. Especially when you are playing the games with the good rules; S17, LS and RSA all increase the value of the ace for the player and those are the kinds of games we are gravitating towards when we play shoes, right? If you are playing a H17, D10 game someplace you might as well half-rank the ace because it's value is degraded for real.

jack said:
Say for example, you were using the ustonAPC, for multiple-deck. Wouldnt you get the best bang for your buck, by sticking to low spreads? In other words, shouldnt a system with high pe's, be kept to low(er) spreads, for optimal RoR?
No way, got to bet proportional to your advantage for the best RoR. All the PE does is make a good count a little better. The only reason to limit a spread is to keep from getting kicked out.
 
Top