Are you supposed to divide by the number of decks left or not? I heard you can to increase accuracy but you don't have to! That makes no sense to me. I mean, if your count is +6 and you have 6 decks left that would make your count 1. WAYYY different than a +6 which means I would be bettering differently. How can both ways be used effectively?
I'm confused about K-O counting?
- Thread starter FreeStyle
- Start date
If you are true counting KO, your betting spread and your playing indices are tied to the true count, which means you have to divide. The true count of a new shoe starts out as a negative number, your IRC divided by the number of decks in the shoe.
If you're using it in running count mode, it still works but you need to use different numbers to trigger your betting and playing decisions. You can use any count in running count mode also, but the reason unbalanced counts like KO work well that way is something called the pivot point. The pivot point is a point in the count where the running count alone gives you perfectly accurate information at any point in the shoe, without doing any division. The pivot point of a balanced count like High-Low is 0, and not a lot happens there. But the pivot point of KO is equal to the IRC (and ends up being at 0 because we start out at the negative of the IRC, just for the sake of convenience) and all kinds of good things start to happen at the pivot point of KO. You start betting big, you start taking extra doubles, you sometimes start taking insurance. Thus your most important decisions can be accurately made without doing any deck estimation or division.
If you're using it in running count mode, it still works but you need to use different numbers to trigger your betting and playing decisions. You can use any count in running count mode also, but the reason unbalanced counts like KO work well that way is something called the pivot point. The pivot point is a point in the count where the running count alone gives you perfectly accurate information at any point in the shoe, without doing any division. The pivot point of a balanced count like High-Low is 0, and not a lot happens there. But the pivot point of KO is equal to the IRC (and ends up being at 0 because we start out at the negative of the IRC, just for the sake of convenience) and all kinds of good things start to happen at the pivot point of KO. You start betting big, you start taking extra doubles, you sometimes start taking insurance. Thus your most important decisions can be accurately made without doing any deck estimation or division.
Oh and just to see if I have this:
So I sit down to a 6 deck game of blackjack using the K-O. I start off withk negative whatever.
I get some cards and now the running count is +10, with 5 decks left. Making the true count +2.
Does that mean I don't need to divide the +10 at all simply because it's after the pivot point of +4?
This is why I'm confused. Also, because of quote from the card counting section on this website: "For extra gain, some people true-count K-O. Although this increases difficulty."
If you can't do anything till the running count is +4 and then you stop true counting than what's the point of true counting at all?
Also, if true counting is indeed essential for multiply decks then why would ANYONE NOT do the true count?
The whole idea that it can be done either way is what is wigging me out.
So I sit down to a 6 deck game of blackjack using the K-O. I start off withk negative whatever.
I get some cards and now the running count is +10, with 5 decks left. Making the true count +2.
Does that mean I don't need to divide the +10 at all simply because it's after the pivot point of +4?
This is why I'm confused. Also, because of quote from the card counting section on this website: "For extra gain, some people true-count K-O. Although this increases difficulty."
If you can't do anything till the running count is +4 and then you stop true counting than what's the point of true counting at all?
Also, if true counting is indeed essential for multiply decks then why would ANYONE NOT do the true count?
The whole idea that it can be done either way is what is wigging me out.
You have calculating the true count right. If you're true counting, you have different bets and index plays for every true count. Now let's say your running count was 0, no matter how many decks are left your true count will be 0, because 0 divided by anything is 0, right? That's the pivot point. In the simplified, non-true counted version of KO everything happens at the pivot point, but if you are doing the division you don't have to worry about the pivot point, just use your true counted spread and indices.
The KO book I hear is excellent, definitely worth it if you want to use KO and it will have all the info you need.
The KO book I hear is excellent, definitely worth it if you want to use KO and it will have all the info you need.
Stop Freestyle! True counting an unbalanced count like KO is a whole different animal from a balanced count like Hi-Lo. Hi-Lo for instance has tags which when you get to the end of the deck will equal zero, that's why its called a balanced count. With KO your count will finish at +4. With KO you don't just divide the running count by the decks remaining. But instead of making you more confused first learn to walk before you run and just learn to use KO like it is supposed to be without a true count, just a running count. Once you master that then you can learn to true count it for extra EV. Like the others have said go buy the KO book, its an easy system and the book is not expensive.
100% agree. I feel like once you read the book a lot of your questions will be answered. The idea of unbalanced counts is that they attempt to eliminate the need to divide, and for shoe games especially, KO is reasonably accurate regarding your advantage; on par with Hi-Lo ( http://www.qfit.com/High-Low-KO.htm ) . Its betting correlation on qfit's website ( http://www.qfit.com/cardcounting/K-O ) is 98% without have to true count it at all. The times when true counting KO will help you is with more accurate indices (increasing your PE), and it will help you bet slightly higher early in the shoe when you have a slight edge that unbalanced KO doesn't notice, and slightly less towards the edge of the shoe in certain counts near the pivot.
But for a novice to intermediate player the KO Full system presented in the book (indices in the appendix) will be more than enough.
If this post is "too much to read", then my basic premise is buy the book
But for a novice to intermediate player the KO Full system presented in the book (indices in the appendix) will be more than enough.
If this post is "too much to read", then my basic premise is buy the book
I probably should give an example of what I mean.
Example: Let's say you just began a shoe at IRC of -20, and the RC reaches -8 after only the first round. While KO says you should wait until about -6 or -4 to raise your bet, it might be a good idea to bet more if it's early in the shoe.
I will leave it to you as an exercise to understand why this is the case :grin:
Example: Let's say you just began a shoe at IRC of -20, and the RC reaches -8 after only the first round. While KO says you should wait until about -6 or -4 to raise your bet, it might be a good idea to bet more if it's early in the shoe.
I will leave it to you as an exercise to understand why this is the case :grin:
Last edited:
Assume - The only answer I can think of is: When the count suddenly raises early in the shoe that means there are more 10s since they couldn't have been used up so early AND have the count go high as quickly as it did.
Whereas if it reached -8 somewhere in the middle of the shoe then it had its chance it go up and down and get rid of some 10s in the process?
Is that what you're pointing out?
Whereas if it reached -8 somewhere in the middle of the shoe then it had its chance it go up and down and get rid of some 10s in the process?
Is that what you're pointing out?
yes, if AM is right, then u would want to use a UB for pitch games, but that has a lot to do with personal prefference and/or if u ever even play pitch games. the inaccuracies would b in both betting and playing i believe. You hav to round the TC before you make a bet, and (if you chose) recalculate (and round again) before each play.
when a count passes a certian point that means the player has an advantage based on the probability of remaingin 10s and As. for TC systems the TC division makes the RC relevant to the number of decks remaing because a RC +8 is not as good with 6 decks remaining as with 3. So the "key count" of a TC system is 0. To make UB systems relevant you hav a net UB per deck that is positive, that is why you start with an IRC of -4 so that you compensate for the unbalance. Opposed to TCing, UB systems increase the UB/deck... -4 for SD, -24 for 6D
when a count passes a certian point that means the player has an advantage based on the probability of remaingin 10s and As. for TC systems the TC division makes the RC relevant to the number of decks remaing because a RC +8 is not as good with 6 decks remaining as with 3. So the "key count" of a TC system is 0. To make UB systems relevant you hav a net UB per deck that is positive, that is why you start with an IRC of -4 so that you compensate for the unbalance. Opposed to TCing, UB systems increase the UB/deck... -4 for SD, -24 for 6D
Sort of. Let's say that after the first round a quarter of the deck was used (5.75 decks remaining), your running count went from -20 to -8 (which is +12), and no 7's came out (the difference between HiLo and KO).
Then, Hi-Lo would have counted that +12/5.75 = +2 and said to bet a bit more, while KO (RC of -8) would have said to wait until it reached a RC of -4 to bet a little more.
In these very few and specific situations, Hi-Lo would be a better predictor of when you should bet slightly more, and in these very few and specific situations True Counting KO would be useful. But there are also situations in the middle of the shoe in which KO is a better predictor.
If you are going to TC anyway I would recommend one of the well researched and published methods such as Hi-Lo, Zen, etc. etc.
Just trying to showcase some differences between HiLo and KO, but as other players have said, it's pretty difficult to compared unbalanced and balanced systems as apples to apples.
So my recommendation is to use one of the published systems (KO Full, Hi-Lo w/ Indices, Zen, etc.) "as is" and master it to the best of your ability.
Then, Hi-Lo would have counted that +12/5.75 = +2 and said to bet a bit more, while KO (RC of -8) would have said to wait until it reached a RC of -4 to bet a little more.
In these very few and specific situations, Hi-Lo would be a better predictor of when you should bet slightly more, and in these very few and specific situations True Counting KO would be useful. But there are also situations in the middle of the shoe in which KO is a better predictor.
If you are going to TC anyway I would recommend one of the well researched and published methods such as Hi-Lo, Zen, etc. etc.
Just trying to showcase some differences between HiLo and KO, but as other players have said, it's pretty difficult to compared unbalanced and balanced systems as apples to apples.
So my recommendation is to use one of the published systems (KO Full, Hi-Lo w/ Indices, Zen, etc.) "as is" and master it to the best of your ability.