Ways to gain an additional advantage?

currently have KO pretty much perfect. Playing 6d, h17, doa, das, 80-90% pen

Thing is, will shuffle tracking and ace location work if it is not humanly shuffled and instead the entire 6 decks are fed into a auto shuffling machine and the dealer grabs the other 6 decks that just finished shuffling?

What are other ways that will give me a greater edge, without being very mentally taxing, error prone, and just too difficult.

Would something like an ace sidecount be really benefitial? or not so much? also, how would I use my sidecount to bennefit me?

Alright PB,
Unfortunately for you this is where the KO count runs out of steam. To use the KO (or any unbalanced count) for shuffle tracking is a complete no go. There has been some research done on this but it has been found (so i've been told) to be a much more difficult mental task, and i've certainly not come accross an information in print.
This is why the KO is recommended if you don't want the extra mental strain that comes with the Hi/Lo. You're not really expected to move on to anything more advanced..
It wouldn't have any real effect on Ace Sequncing, but as a large part of AS is shuffle tracking, you'd be putting a lot of work in and missing a lot of the avalible advantage.
In honesty, all the advanced techniques are mentally taxing and difficult to learn. It's a big step between counting and them.
Additional side counts aren't really the answer. They will provide you with a few tenths of a % extra advantage (at least an A side count will), but nothing dramatic.
Aces have 2 different effects on how you play. For the purposes of betting they act like a high card (i.e. you bet more when there are more A's due to the higher blackjack probability) and like a small card for playing purposes (where you'll regularly consider them to have a value of 1). The premis behind keeping a side count of Aces is that you keep your count without Aces for playing purposes and adjust your count by your sidecount for betting purposes. I've not looked into this at all, but i don't see that working with an unbalanced count.
As i said before, unbalanced counts with designed with the idea in mind of keeping it simple. If you really want to gain a greater advantage, you pretty much need to move to a balanced count. I'd suggest the Hi/Lo. It's the standard if you want extra 'bolt on' packages.

RJT.

Well said, RJT. :grin:

These types of advanced plays will not work with the auto-shufflers. Shuffle tracking relies on watching the shuffle and seeing where your groups of cards are going. That doesn’t work when the cards are hidden inside the machine (unless you know a lot about the machine). Ace sequencing also relies on knowing how many riffles and strips are performed during the shuffle in order to predict when the aces will be dealt. Again, you will not know this with the auto shufflers. To make things worse, the ASMs don’t mimic traditional hand shuffles (break the deck in half, interleave the cards, etc.) so the prediction methods are not the same.

-Sonny-

Sorry Sonny, you're completely right. I replied in haste just after getting up this morning before i rushed out the door. Auto-shufflers completely negate all but the side counts

I wouldn't mess with the sidecount. Given the parameters you describe, the most powerful thing you can do, by far, is play only the tables with 90% pen and eschew the ones with 80% pen. How's that for easy?

But please be careful. In a 6D shoe with 90% pen, KO will have you overbetting significantly at the end of the shoe. This might be good cover though- since surveillance universally used High-Low, you'll look like a guy who always bets more at the end of the shoe, even when there is no advantage.

so should I still stick to following the book on how to ramp my bet with the count? or should I take into effect the number of decks dealt and multiply that by 4, then see if indeed the fact that the count is high actually correlates with an advantage.

for example, say 5 decks have been dealt out and 1/2 a deck is left before the shuffle. if I have a count of +19 above the IRC I should bet 4 units, but actually, expectation is for the running count to be at +20 above the IRC at this point, and I am at a disadvantage and should be only betting 1 unit??

At that point, you've made your count complicated enough you might as well use High-Low, no? Once you start true counting an unbalanced count you give up its only advantage, which is simplicity.

I don't necessarily disagree, but keep in mind that TKO outperforms Hi-Lo (presumably due to the added information from counting the sevens). There may be some advantage to being able to freely switch between KO and TKO. I can see switching to the simpler count if fatigued, if you plan on playing a longer session and don't want to burn out, if you want to have a few drinks, etc. If you are already familiar with KO, learning TKO rather than Hi-Lo might be nice for this reason, since it's impractical to switch between a simpler and advanced count that use different point values.

The difference in points value is fairly small and the whole purpose is to gain a substancial advantage. KO advantage stops with the KO, you can't build any further. Hi/Lo is more diverse and allows you to expand.

RJT.

I agree with Sabre - if one is using KO and is tempted to switch to HiLo, a better alternative is TKO. zg

Makes sense to me, too. If KO is about equal to Hi Lo, then TKO (or adjusting the bet ramp based on # decks played in KO, so you don't miss the early advantages) should have a higher EV than Hi Lo.

If you're going to abandon unbalanced counting altogether, I think switching to Hi-Lo is a fine idea. My point was that if you want to retain working knowledge of an unbalanced count to use in situations where you want to exert less brain power, then I think learning TKO is better option for someone who already knows KO.

Switching back and forth between KO and Hi-Lo is probably not a great idea, since you'll screw up counting/not counting the 7.

I think I understand the basics of TKO, but where can I learn more about it?? Preferably without buying another book

Zen, we are talking about someone who feels that counting alone in not giving them a large enough advantage. I agree that if all they were looking to do was use an improved counting system TKO is the better route - let's be honest, they've already done most of the work and it saves re-learning point values, but that's not what they are looking to do.
Now i understand that the current playing conditions don't allow for anything more than counting, but the improvement between the KO and TKO or even Hi/Lo is small. My view is that although i may not be able to use a specific technique today, who knows where i'll be tomorrow and what game conditions i'll face, so i learn what i feel will benifit me the most.

RJT.

Is there a particular reason why TKO can't be used with shuffle tracking and other advanced techniques.

You could learn how to beat the various side bets on blackjack games. A good example would be a game like Lucky Ladies. The good thing about a game like this is that it can be used without learning a second count.

Honestly re-learning point values is really really easy. It might be a bit awkward at first, but that will pass very soon. So the switch from KO to TKO is not very much easier than KO to Hi-Lo.

I say if you are going to be true-counting anyway, just learn Hi-Lo. No reason to learn TKO. Hi-Lo is used by more people so there is a lot more information readily available about it.

Yes. It's far more akward.
Shuffle tracking - or packet tracking - involves keeping a record of +ve and -ve cards in a small packet and tracking them through the shuffle. As you need to know the value or more accurately strength of the packet, an unbalanced count makes this very difficult. Using a balanced count, 5 extra high cards in a half deck packet is easy to calculate, but as an unbalanced count counts extra low cards, it throws your assessment of it strength out of whack. Unbalanced counts rely on reaching a pivot point to indicate advantage, which is unrealistic in a small packet - what would your PP be now that you are playing a 1 deck packet with extra high cards be, or more importantly what would your initial running count be? How much should you raise you bet? When should you drop your bets?
Shuffle tracking is complex enough without having to factor in all the extra hassle of dealing with an unbalanced count.
The other advanced techniques should be unaffected, but most sequencing techniques involve packet tracking to some degree. To learn all the practicalities of tracking a packet without actually being able to take full advantage of this skill due to an over complex unbalanced count method would be foolish.
Basically unbalanced counts just aren't as compatible with shuffle tracking as a balanced counts.

RJT.

ZG, wait a minute

I do agree with you TKO is stronger than HiLo, but there are some caveats.

First, it is my understanding TKO used is solely for betting purposes, not indice play, and the player needs to be comfortable with negative TC's.

Second, the IRC is number of decks * -4 versus the IRC listed in KO BJ book. Thus one needs to have special indices.

Third, it's very difficult to find literature about TKO.

One compromise is to use HiLo and keep a side count of "7" so one has optionality between TC mode in HiLo and RC mode in KO.

Cheers