Another Ko Question

[b]

I am trying to convince myself that using the Ko system is worthwhile so I wont have to do the true count conversions.
But the more I read about it the more I am concerned.
I finished reading KO Blackjack last week and was rather disappointed that for a book of 150 pages, 1/3 was about the history of card counting and another 1/3 was about not getting caught (both topics which are covered in every other BJ book). So only a 1/3 is about the system and even that is not well written and confusing. There is nothing about the need to adjust the Key count at various deck penetrations so as to not underbet early or overbet late in the shoe.
Then I started reading Blackbelt in Blackjack by Synder to get another look at an unbalanced count system. He says that he thought of the Ko system years ago and knew it didnt really work so he scrapped it and created the Red Seven system. He says the Ko sims in the Ko book have been proven to be wrong but doesnt go into specifics.
Also I noticed that in his Red Seven system his pivot point is 0 and has no Key count (or key count = pivot =0). so why does KO use a key count different from the pivot which only makes for problems early and late? (8dk, irc = -28, kc = -6, pivot = +4)
The more I read the more I learn the more confused I get. Help anyone?
I continue to practice the Hi-low but an looking for a good reason to feel ok about ko which is easier but maybe not that accurate. Not crazy about true count conversions but maybe thats the only way to get the accuracy?
Thought?
Bobp

[21forme]

The KO sims in the book show KO to be superior to other systems like HiLo. They were flawed in the way the betting levels were chosen. In reality, KO has withstood the test of time. Sims by many gurus (Snyder, Schlesinger, Wattenberger, etc.) have validated KO as being about equal to many of the level 1 balanced coints for shoe games. I use it and I'm pleased with it.

The recent posts (mine included) on adjusting the KO betting ramps for early in the shoe only add additional advantage. KO is still a good count without the adjustments, but better with. My advice is follow the book for starters, then make adjustments as you get more confortable and familiar with the system.

Regarding the book, the system is fairly simple and didn't need several hundred pages. The authors chose not to bore the average reader with pages and pages of charts and tables, but provided a how-to book. There are plenty of other books that provide more theory and raw data. If that's what you want, read Schlesinger's BJA.

[EasyRhino]

I think if Fuchs and Vancura actually recommended using a sliding scale of running counts while playing through a shoe, it would totally ruin the book for its intended purpose of creating an easy yet effective system.

Since KO counts all of the sevens, it is a "very" unbalanced count. There is a substantial gap between the key count (where you should have some sort of advantage), and the pivot point (where the large advantage is strongly correlated to true count of +4). If you waited until the pivot point until you bet, you'd hardly ever play.

Since Red 7 only counts half the sevens, the pivot point is more like a TC of +2. Since that gap is smaller, I imagine that could make for play modifications. However, I haven't studied up on R7, so I'll stop talking now.

[sabre]

I've run several sims that have convinced me that KO, despite the errors related to missing early advantages and betting into late disadvantages, is very comparable in strength to HiLo for 6 and 8 deck shoes. I'll post some data when I have a chance later today.

[QFIT]

Originally Posted by EasyRhino

Since KO counts all of the sevens, it is a "very" unbalanced count. There is a substantial gap between the key count (where you should have some sort of advantage), and the pivot point (where the large advantage is strongly correlated to true count of +4).

Oddly, the fact that it is "more unbalanced" makes it more accurate given optimal betting. The "errors" also exist in balanced strategies, to a lesser extent. They are nothing to be concerned about. All counting systems are compromises. The set of compromises in KO in toto is no worse than the set of compromises in HiLo. If you read something that says otherwise, you might examine the motives of the writer.

[golfnut101]

QFIT

I have read some posts lately questioning accuracy of KO late in a shoe. How does this compare with hi/lo, and, how does a person come to this conclusion ?

thnx

[QFIT]

Originally Posted by golfnut101

QFIT

I have read some posts lately questioning accuracy of KO late in a shoe. How does this compare with hi/lo, and, how does a person come to this conclusion ?

thnx

Both balanced and unbalanced strategies have varying accuracies at different depths for different reasons. In the case of balanced strategies, the problem is floating advantage. The effects are minor and overblown by some. Yes you can gain a slight improvement by correcting for such inaccuracies. Indeed you can correct any number of inaccuracies using techniques like altering the RC by depth; applying multi-parameter tables, side counting for purposes of betting, playing and/or Insurance, counting by inference in pitch games, etc. But all of these are advanced techniques that realize little gain. They do not point to any serious flaw in any particular strategy. They can aid in the compromises that exist in counting strategies. And it is important to understand that all strategies have these compromises. If you want to squeeze every bit of advantage out of a game; go for it. But, such techniques are not a requirement nor do they point to serious flaws.

[golfnut101]

If you are a dime player with a 1-10 spread, what would your difference in EV be in the end with these added 'advantages' ? It seems to me that it is not worth the trade off. Any further thoughts QFIT ?

[QFIT]

Originally Posted by golfnut101

If you are a dime player with a 1-10 spread, what would your difference in EV be in the end with these added 'advantages' ? It seems to me that it is not worth the trade off. Any further thoughts QFIT ?

There isn't one answer. It depends on a very large number of variables. That's why we do sims. If you want a general answer - players, including many pros, have been opting for simpler systems than decades past. Most people do not believe the extra effort is worth the gain. But, there is a gain and if you spend a huge amount of time playing it is worth it to some.

[cpink12345]

In previous threads people have talk about adjusting the pivot point based on the number of deacks played, what are those numbers? With 3/4 of a deck remaining is it correct to increase my bet at +1 when that is where the count should be with the unbalance 7? Is it worth changing my index play with it?
This is my first time posting. This is a great site with a wealth of info on it.
thank you