Best card counting system for a rookie?

[aarono2690]

I've been practicing the Hi-Lo system lately and while I've read it slightly outperforms the KO system in the long run, I'm sure the KO system is many times easier and less mentally taxing.

I usually go the casino once a week and usually bring small amounts of $100 to $3 minimum bet tables. I'm not that great with math, but card counting isn't too complicated but the easier the better.

Think it's best to practice Hi-Lo or KO?

[EasyRhino]

I recommend going with the most advanced system that you're really, really, really,comfortable with.

Other math nerds have run tests indicating that hi-lo is still, most of the time, a little better than KO.

http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/...leofbabies.htm

I'm a KO user, but at this moment, I think, all things equal, I would prefer to have hi-lo nailed, for the following reason:
- KO gets a little squishy at the beginning and end of shoes, I'm not sure if I'm woning in at the right points
- It sometimes over or underestimates advantages, I guess this might lead to more variance than desired.
- Unbalanced counts can't really measure negative counts well, I think this makes negative index plays impossible
- It also makes it more difficult to judge wong-out points
- Hi-lo TC's are the fundamental lingua franca of card counting discussions and strategies, not KO RCs.

However, my deck estimation skills are horrible, and my mental division skills are also bad. It would probably take me more time to practice hi-lo to a reasonable level than it took me to learn KO when I was total noob. But that's just me.

KO still does a good job of pushing money out on the table when there's an advantage. And that's 90% of the point of card-counting right there.

[Mimosine]

Originally Posted by EasyRhino

I'm a KO user, but at this moment, I think, all things equal, I would prefer to have hi-lo nailed

i'm a much newer KO user than EasyRhino, but have this same feeling as well. having only used KO for roughly 20 hours of casino time.

[neemo6]

Either KO or Red7 are what i like to call bang for your buck counts. Easy to learn and apply counts and are nearly as good as the Hi-lo.

[rogue1]

I use Kiss III which like KO is an unbalanced count. It gets the money. I've read that the difference between the most complicated and least complicated counts is fractions of a penny per hand-so why get complicated?
Personally if I don't have to estimate the number of decks in play and divide them into the running count I'd rather not. Keep it simple is my motto.
Good luck.

[ChefJJ]

I don't Wong in to hot shoes, but tend towards KO. I've got more table experience with Hi-Lo than KO, but prefer KO. Don't know the numbers behind their performance, just personal preference.

You may have heard it before, but I find KO easy to manipulate and really like the index play system.

good luck

[b]

I had an eye opening experience at a real table using KO. I noticed how I kept getting beyond the Key Count only at really late penetrations into the shoe. I started thinking more about that and thru people on this board learned that KO doesnt work so great early on (missed opportunities) and late (over betting) as compared to Hi/Low. To get around this you have to adjust the Key count based on decks played to get better results. So now you have to remember 8 levels of key counts (for 8 decks) plus betting ramps at each of these deck levels.
Plus I never felt comfortable really knowing if the deck was simply + or - using an unbalanced count. (How does a rc = 21 correspond to the +/- count?) I guess its just me but I want to know that.
So I have made the switch to Hi-Low. For now its the kitchen table and practice, practice, practice. I am not confident having to do deck estimation and true count conversion but only a real life casino live practice run will tell.
Until then I keep practicing.
I just want to get good at one system and perserve with it through the ups and downs.

[CarlB]

Many years ago before systems were given names I chose 3,4,5,6,7 as +1, 2,8,9 as zero, and 10,A as -1. The reason I chose 2,8,9 as zero is because in Dr. Trorpe's "Beat The Dealer" 2.8,9 out of the deck made the least difference. The most popular system however seems to be 2,3,4,5,6 is +1. 7,8,9 is zero. 10 and A is -1. Now tested at 51% playing eff. , and 97% betting corr. Whatever that means. The system I first mentioned is rated 55% playing eff. and 95% betting corr. Not enough difference for me to change.

Also I have added a side count of Aces to my counting, which means if the shoe is Ace rich I will up my bet amount a little early or also play a second hand early.

Speed Count is the easiest and fastest to learn. Two ways: first 5 is a +1 and Ace is a -1, count is balanced. Bet higher if count is plus. This system is balanced and no math involved in cards remaining in shoe. Play basic strat.
Second Speed Count method: Start with plus 4 or 5. Unbalanced system. The 4 and 5 count as +1. The Ace counts as -1. Bet units about 1/2 the count and play basic strat. Works easy to learn in a short amount of time, a day or two. Not as good as the two system first mentioned that may take 700 to 1000 hours of practice. In those system you vary basic strat. with the count. Has a lot more power, but more time to learn. If you want to be a pro build a good foundation.

Take what I say with "a grain of salt", 95% of the people who claim they are card counters are not.

I hope this helps.

[Automatic Monkey]

CarlB in case you didn't already know, your system now has a name and is called Uston Plus-Minus. It is almost as strong as High-Low, not worth switching over.

But are you adjusting your bet in accordance with an ace sidecount too? I don't think you're supposed to do that, being you already are reckoning the ace in the primary count. In ace-reckoned systems ace sidecounts are for adjusting play and insurance decisions only, not betting.

[CarlB]

Auto monkey thanks for ur reply. Now I have a name for my count: Uston Plus-Minus. I know Uston. As far as insurance ( lost my last one at a casino, but that is another story), I insure if the count is +8% or higher. The other situation is if the 10s on the table equals the numbers of player 7,6 or 5, I insure regardless of the count. ( 10s clump ).

I'm a newbee at this forum, but not a bj.


Any comments?

Thanks,
Carl.