AO2 v. Zen

C

Count

Well-Known Member
#42
#42
So now that that is out of the way....

Now that I understand that, I have another question.

Like I said earlier, I found a casino with 2D games and pretty nice rules. I have been told that UBZ would be my best bet and I have no problem learning this system. But ZG said NOT to learn the indices from BBIBJ so where do I need to look to find READILY available Indexes, Insurance count number and other charts. Deck resolution can be one or 2D... Whichever one has already been made out and ready to use.
 
zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
#43
#43
Count said:
I have been told that UBZ would be my best bet and I have no problem learning this system. But ZG said NOT to learn the indices from BBIBJ so where do I need to look to find READILY available Indexes, Insurance count number and other charts. Deck resolution can be one or 2D... Whichever one has already been made out and ready to use.
Click to expand...
UBZ is an unbalanced count requiring no TC conversion. It is not found in BBIBJ. And the current ZEN in BBIBJ is a 1/4D TC system not ideal.

Let us first be clear on what you are thinking ZEN or UBZ? zg

Ps - And comment on my 1D TC / RC example below so I know that you are clear on the previous issue.

1D TC w/RC = +4:
4D remain/4 = +1
2D remain/2 = +2
1D remain/1 = +4
1/2D remain*2 = +8
1/4D remain*4 = +16
 
C

Count

Well-Known Member
#44
#44
zengrifter said:
UBZ is an unbalanced count requiring no TC conversion. It is not found in BBIBJ. And the current ZEN in BBIBJ is a 1/4D TC system not ideal.

Let us first be clear on what you are thinking ZEN or UBZ? zg

Ps - And comment on my 1D TC / RC example below so I know that you are clear on the previous issue.

1D TC w/RC = +4:
4D remain/4 = +1
2D remain/2 = +2
1D remain/1 = +4
1/2D remain*2 = +8
1/4D remain*4 = +16
Click to expand...
My bad ZG, thats what I meant. I remeber you saying ZEN in BBIBJ is not advisable and I think about 2 weeks ago in another thread we talked about using UBZ becuase of ZEN.

And on the Resolution, no problem now. For every 1D remaining you divide your running count by that many decks left, this is Resolution. As the card go out, your resolution doesnt change. Let's say you sat down at a 4D game, your denominator would be 4 because there are FOUR 1D segments total. later in the game, you get down to 2D, your denominator would be 2 because TWO cecks are left. No problem now.
 
zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
#45
#45
Count said:
Let's say you sat down at a 4D game, your denominator would be 4 because there are FOUR 1D segments total. later in the game, you get down to 2D, your denominator would be 2 because TWO cecks are left. No problem now.
Click to expand...
And at 1/2D? 1/4D? (see above example)

So we are NOT thinking UBZ then, right? Nor the published version of ZEN, right? zg
 
C

Count

Well-Known Member
#46
#46
Yeah the 1/2 and 1/4 I've got down as well. If there is only 26 cards left (1/2) of a single deck, you would divide your running count by 1/2 because HALF of one deck is left. Dividing by one half is the same as multiplying by 2 and 1/4 is the same as multiplying by 4. So if your RC is 4 like you said in your example and there is 1/2 of ONE deck left your TC would be 8 and it would be 16 if there was 1/4 left.

And I guess a better way to restate my question is in a blackjack game with:

2D
65-75% pen
H17
Split up to 4 times
Double down on any 2 cards
DAS
and BJ pays 3:2

what system would you go with? I've been thinking Hi-OPT II or UBZ. Wanting advice/experience on which system to use and if anyone can tell me/show me the insurance number, BS indexes, MP tables and whatever else for the system you would use in the above situation. Ease of use is not an issue with me and I'm not wanting you to have to bust your asses to create tables for me. If there are only tables for 1D true conversions, those will be fine with me. I have heard that some players like to use 2D TC resolution because it is more accurate but if there are no tables READILY available, 1D resolution tables are fine with me.
 
C

Count

Well-Known Member
#47
#47
Im sorry?

Did I say something wrong in here? It's been four days since my last post on this thread and nothing but the views have changed. Did I hit a sore spot or say some sort of blackjack blasphemy?
 
R

rukus

Well-Known Member
#48
#48
one statement, then my answer: i think you need to make sure you know exactly what you want. i've now seen you flip flop in this thread between saying that you were considering zen and then UBZ and then zen again and then UBZ - these are two different systems and i hope you understand that. which one were you actually considering? zen is found in blackbelt in blackjack by snyder, UBZ is found in george C.'s unbalanced zen count II.

no for my answer to your question: there is no one answer. exactly what you wanted to hear, right?

truthfully, it all depends on which system you feel most comfortable with.

are you able to maintain a sidecount or two perfectly? can you do it in a casino environment while chatting it up with the pit? if so, maybe hi-opt II or ao2 are good for you.

if you can maintain/calculate a true count perfectly and can handle level-2 counts, but dont feel comfortable with sidecounts and MP tables, zen or mentor would be excellent choices.

if you can true count but want a level-1 count, hi-lo is the standard here.

if you cant or dont want to calculate true counts, then you can choose from unbalanced systems - unbalanced zen, ko, red 7

you also need to consider whether you are going to be playing both pitch and shoe games? maybe you can keep sidecounts easily for a pitch game but find it cumbersome in shoes - if you are playing 90% shoe games, a system like hi-opt2 or ao2 might then not be recommended. zen would be a nice balance that performs well in both shoe games and pitch games without the need for sidecounts.

SO, it all depends on what youre abilities and comfort levels are. there is no one answer.
 
zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
#49
#49
rukus said:
still missing it. when you say 2D TC, it means 2D resoltion.

resoltion is what defines what you divide your running count by - if you are using 2D TC resolution, that means you divide by the number of 2D segments remaining. you might use that with 1/2 deck estimation (you round what you see as remaining to be dealt down to the nearest half deck), which means you estimate the number of 2D segments remaining down to the nearest half deck.

let's use your example - a 2D game. at the begining before any cards are dealt, your TC denominator would be 1, since there is one 2D segment left. after 1 deck has been dealt, your denominator is now 1/2 since there is only 1/2 of a 2D segment remaining (ie 1/2*2 = 1Deck remaining). this is resolution.

comparison between 1D and 2D resoltion -
in a 2 deck game, before any cards are dealt: using 1D resolution, your denominator would be 2 (since there are 2 1D segments remaining). using 2D resolution, your denominator would be 1 since there is 1 2D segment remaining.

now lets explore estimation - now lets say almost 1.5 decks have been dealt. instead of rounding this down in your estimation to only 1Deck remaining and using 1/2 as your denominator in your TC calculation, you do the following: you round to the nearest half deck and say, ok, 1.5 decks have been dealt, meaning 3/4 of a 2D segment have been dealt and only 1/4 of a 2D segment remains (1/4*2D = 0.5D remaining). so now i would use 1/4 as my denominator in my TC calculation.

so to compare estimations: if 1.4 decks have been dealt and you were using 1D estimation, your denominator would be 1/2 but if you were using half deck estimation you would use 1/4 as your denominator.

make any sense?
Click to expand...
 
zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
#50
#50
Count said:
what system would you go with? I've been thinking Hi-OPT II or UBZ.
Click to expand...
I would start with BJ BlueBook and learn Mentor, or if the true count adjustment is beyond you under real world conditions, KISS-3.

UBZ, okay - the UBZ open source is posted at the top of this forum... or ZEN with 1D or 2D TC, not Snyder's current 'TE' 1/4DTC

Definitely NOT - HO2 or AO2. zg
 
zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
#51
#51
Count said:
2D
65-75% pen
H17
Split up to 4 times
Double down on any 2 cards
DAS
and BJ pays 3:2

what system would you go with?
Click to expand...
Mentor example (2D TC)* -

2D TC w/RC = +4:

2.0D remain/1.0 = +4
1.7D remain*1.3 = +5
1.5D remain*1.5 = +6
1.0D remain*2.0 = +8
0.7D remain*3.0 = +12
0.5D remain*4.0 = +16

*The great thing about Mentor and BlueBook is that author Fred Renzey is a regular here and can help occaisionally.
 
C

Count

Well-Known Member
#52
#52
rukus said:
one statement, then my answer: i think you need to make sure you know exactly what you want. i've now seen you flip flop in this thread between saying that you were considering zen and then UBZ and then zen again and then UBZ - these are two different systems and i hope you understand that. which one were you actually considering? zen is found in blackbelt in blackjack by snyder, UBZ is found in george C.'s unbalanced zen count II.

no for my answer to your question: there is no one answer. exactly what you wanted to hear, right?

truthfully, it all depends on which system you feel most comfortable with.

are you able to maintain a sidecount or two perfectly? can you do it in a casino environment while chatting it up with the pit? if so, maybe hi-opt II or ao2 are good for you.

if you can maintain/calculate a true count perfectly and can handle level-2 counts, but dont feel comfortable with sidecounts and MP tables, zen or mentor would be excellent choices.

if you can true count but want a level-1 count, hi-lo is the standard here.

if you cant or dont want to calculate true counts, then you can choose from unbalanced systems - unbalanced zen, ko, red 7

you also need to consider whether you are going to be playing both pitch and shoe games? maybe you can keep sidecounts easily for a pitch game but find it cumbersome in shoes - if you are playing 90% shoe games, a system like hi-opt2 or ao2 might then not be recommended. zen would be a nice balance that performs well in both shoe games and pitch games without the need for sidecounts.

SO, it all depends on what youre abilities and comfort levels are. there is no one answer.
Click to expand...
Im sorry about the mix up with Zen and UBZ. I know they are two seperate systems but what I got mixed up was the books they are in. I thought Zen and UBZ were both in BBIBJ. I think that is what confused everyone, Sorry bout that.

And on the comfort level thing: I currently use Hi-OPT I as my "usual" and have no problem with that system. Sidecounts are not an issue with me nor is TC calculations or eyeing how many cards are left or anything like that.

I think this should clear things up a lil bit more:
I would like to see the charts or told about books to check out on BOTH Hi-OPT II and UBZ so I can decide which system I like better. I play mostly pitch games so finding a system with a nice balance between shoe and pitch is not an issue. I just want to keep my options open and I'm going to do it by studying both systems in depth.... I just need the material to study. So, can anyone give me some websites with the stuff or your own charts or an online store to buy some suggested books? That's what I've been trying to ask. Sorry if I wasn't getting to the point across. Mental error on my part.
 
R

rukus

Well-Known Member
#57
#57
Count said:
Just checked out the stats and ZEN.... I like it. But I remember you saying the BS indexes in BBIBJ which covers ZEN are not ideal and we shouldn't follow them. What should I follow?
Click to expand...
(Dead link: http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/zen_count_indices.htm)
 
zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
#58
#58
rukus said:
(Dead link: http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/zen_count_indices.htm)
Click to expand...
Yes those are the starting point. Read ZG Interview and ROUND them as suggested, then they are good for any# decks.

The current BBIBJ offers a 1/4D TC. Snyder got it backwards.

Renzey got it right and published his similat Mentor on a 2D TC basis.

A 2D TC ZEN would be ultimate... BUT you are already using 1DTC, right? zg
 
R

rukus

Well-Known Member
#59
#59
zengrifter said:
Yes those are the starting point. Read ZG Interview and ROUND them as suggested, then they are good for any# decks.

The current BBIBJ offers a 1/4D TC. Snyder got it backwards.

Renzey got it right and published his similat Mentor on a 2D TC basis.

A 2D TC ZEN would be ultimate... BUT you are already using 1DTC, right? zg
Click to expand...
does anyoen currently use zen with 2D TC? if there are people out there interested in a 2D TC Zen, i can go ahead and generate some specific indices if no one has done so already. Additionally, you can just double the indices in that link for generic ones. have a bit of free time now and the only other BJ research i have on my plate is what i wanted to do a few weeks back regarding UBZ with 7 sidecount vs regular balanced zen (and maybe AO2 with side count aces vs UBZ with side count of 7s) .
 
Last edited:
zengrifter

zengrifter

Banned
#60
#60
rukus said:
does anyoen currently use zen with 2D TC? if there are people out there interested in a 2D TC Zen, i can go ahead and generate some generic indices if no one has done so already. have a bit of free time now and the only other BJ research i have on my plate is what i wanted to do a few weeks back regarding UBZ with 7 sidecount vs regular balanced zen (and maybe AO2 with side count aces vs UBZ with side count of 7s) .
Click to expand...
Generate 2DTC Rounded Zen and some bivaluate adjusts for 7s/8s block.

Then show the performance SCORES vs. A02 w/As.

Start a new RUCKUS, I mean thread. zg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top