i need help with the zen count please
- Thread starter kune gochu
- Start date
Well, the relative edge with Zen is correlated with the true count. For example, at -3 TC, you have a -1.0% edge (my wong-out point), a +2 TC (per whole deck) you have an edge of roughly 0.5%, at +4 it is an advantage of 1.0%, at +8 its around 2.3%, and at +10 its around 3%.
Although I'm no expert, a number of folks here recommend that you should use Zen with True Counting per whole deck, rather than the true edge methodology covered in Snyder's Blackbelt book. Thats a good thing for me, as I have a hard enough time in judging whole decks, let alone quarters of a deck!
If you are asking about its strength as a count, a number of blackjack researchers, including Norm Wattenburger (creator of the excellent casino verite software) and Caraculo, claim that Zen is the strongest of the level 2 strategies in SCORE comparisons. My own sims back up that claim. If you look at the open sourced UBZ post up above, you can see a compromised UBZ I came up with that bests the sweet 16 fab 4 versions of the RPC and Mentor and performs evenly with the full index versions of these. Zen is the only level 2 count that is head and shoulders above these with full indices. Caraculo also claims that Zen beats the level 3 halves. I haven't been able to reproduce that.
Although I'm no expert, a number of folks here recommend that you should use Zen with True Counting per whole deck, rather than the true edge methodology covered in Snyder's Blackbelt book. Thats a good thing for me, as I have a hard enough time in judging whole decks, let alone quarters of a deck!
If you are asking about its strength as a count, a number of blackjack researchers, including Norm Wattenburger (creator of the excellent casino verite software) and Caraculo, claim that Zen is the strongest of the level 2 strategies in SCORE comparisons. My own sims back up that claim. If you look at the open sourced UBZ post up above, you can see a compromised UBZ I came up with that bests the sweet 16 fab 4 versions of the RPC and Mentor and performs evenly with the full index versions of these. Zen is the only level 2 count that is head and shoulders above these with full indices. Caraculo also claims that Zen beats the level 3 halves. I haven't been able to reproduce that.
You really think? When I simmed my Zen-Ultimate strategy (rounded Zen, similar to the Ben Franklin but using about 50 of the indices I got from your interview) using division by WHOLE decks for shoes and HALF deck precision for pitch games. And it performed great...easily besting RPC and Mentor with full indices (by contrast my version of UBZ performed only on par with these fully indexed level 2 counts). I didn't play around with anything more precise than this because I had no intention of doing so. It simmed great and I practiced ~10,000 rounds with it using CVBJ...and I tripled my bankroll simply spreading 1-8 in a six deck game S17 DAS RSA LS. A small sample, I know, but everything that I've read seems to indicate that TC by whole decks is plenty good enough for shoes.
Hello Fred,
In your book you list the EVs of various level 2 systems, and I don't question your results at all. The chart I produced was a comparison of the SCOREs, which of course, factors in standard deviation. I'm certainly no expert, but I've read that counting the "9" is the only thing hurting Mentor. Specifically, counting the nine hurts the insurance index, the most important one of all. Still, the semi-neutralized ace of Mentor increases its playing efficiency, and that is why most of the SCORE sims I've seen shown Mentor and the RPC running neck and neck.
Also, it should be noted that Norm (of Casino Verite) and Caraculo were the first ones on Advantageplayer.com to point out Zen's superiority as the strongest level 2 strategy. My sims backed up their claim. Caraculo claims that Zen is even better than the level 3 Halves, but I have not been able to confirm that.
In your book you list the EVs of various level 2 systems, and I don't question your results at all. The chart I produced was a comparison of the SCOREs, which of course, factors in standard deviation. I'm certainly no expert, but I've read that counting the "9" is the only thing hurting Mentor. Specifically, counting the nine hurts the insurance index, the most important one of all. Still, the semi-neutralized ace of Mentor increases its playing efficiency, and that is why most of the SCORE sims I've seen shown Mentor and the RPC running neck and neck.
Also, it should be noted that Norm (of Casino Verite) and Caraculo were the first ones on Advantageplayer.com to point out Zen's superiority as the strongest level 2 strategy. My sims backed up their claim. Caraculo claims that Zen is even better than the level 3 Halves, but I have not been able to confirm that.
I wish I could help you with this decision, but I can't make up my own mind either. With practice, I can count the Zen or UBZ values under 15 seconds per deck. So that isn't a problem for me. Here is how I see these two level one counts:
Zen - As I said in an earlier thread, a number of prominent BJ researchers have shown this is the most powerful level 2 strategy in SCORE without an ace side count. My own sims back up that claim. However, you are required to true count here. I never felt very confident in my ability to estimate discards (although I can do very well in the CV discard tray drills), so the 1/4 deck TC described in BBIBJ was out. I read here and elsewhere that higher performance can be achieved with count per whole deck so, I generated floored indices with that goal in mind. And I started practicing using whole deck accuracy for shoes, half deck for pitch games...the chart on the previous was page was generated using that level of accuracy. I thought perhaps I could get my deck estimation skills honed to this level...until ZG came along and said that I wasn't using high enough accuracy. I do respect his opinion, and am now questioning whether I should be true counting at all??? ZG, do you really stand by that earlier statement???
UBZ - you can see my contributions in the UBZ-OS post above. No true counting required! While that certainly is a plus, you have to generate wong-out points that differ depending on how many decks you are going up against (whereas I have a fixed wong-out TC with Zen). You have different IRCs to remember. Whenever I've practiced unbalanced counts, I always felt like I was "no man's land" for the vast majority of the time....meaning you are above your wong-out point, but beneath the point where you start raising your bets. Unless you true count, you have no way of knowing whether the remaining pack is slightly positive, negative, or neutral. Sure, you can true count it, but I think true counting balanced strategies is much easier than unbalanced. Even with these disadvantages, my sims show that my reduced rounded 25 index strategy for UBZ in RUNNING COUNT MODE ONLY performs on par with fulled indexed perfectly true counted Mentor and the RPC.
Which to go with???? I have no idea!
Any advice people???
Zen - As I said in an earlier thread, a number of prominent BJ researchers have shown this is the most powerful level 2 strategy in SCORE without an ace side count. My own sims back up that claim. However, you are required to true count here. I never felt very confident in my ability to estimate discards (although I can do very well in the CV discard tray drills), so the 1/4 deck TC described in BBIBJ was out. I read here and elsewhere that higher performance can be achieved with count per whole deck so, I generated floored indices with that goal in mind. And I started practicing using whole deck accuracy for shoes, half deck for pitch games...the chart on the previous was page was generated using that level of accuracy. I thought perhaps I could get my deck estimation skills honed to this level...until ZG came along and said that I wasn't using high enough accuracy. I do respect his opinion, and am now questioning whether I should be true counting at all??? ZG, do you really stand by that earlier statement???
UBZ - you can see my contributions in the UBZ-OS post above. No true counting required! While that certainly is a plus, you have to generate wong-out points that differ depending on how many decks you are going up against (whereas I have a fixed wong-out TC with Zen). You have different IRCs to remember. Whenever I've practiced unbalanced counts, I always felt like I was "no man's land" for the vast majority of the time....meaning you are above your wong-out point, but beneath the point where you start raising your bets. Unless you true count, you have no way of knowing whether the remaining pack is slightly positive, negative, or neutral. Sure, you can true count it, but I think true counting balanced strategies is much easier than unbalanced. Even with these disadvantages, my sims show that my reduced rounded 25 index strategy for UBZ in RUNNING COUNT MODE ONLY performs on par with fulled indexed perfectly true counted Mentor and the RPC.
Which to go with???? I have no idea!
Any advice people???
I heartily recommend KO for beginners
Folks, KO is easy. I was about to "upgrade" to either UBZ or ZEN, but the advice of helpful people here made me rethink. Nothing is easier than KO. I make few mistakes. It's easy and it makes money. I am as new a player as you can get; I had my first counting experience in June of this year. I have made over $3 thousand. To upgrade I will have to expect more error in my play until I can get enough road miles to work out the bugs. Even with a simple system, if you are tired, distracted, or have been playing for hours, you can make mistakes. How many more mistakes you will make in a more difficult system! Is the upgrade worth it? As someone told me, what's the difference if at the end of an hour you are $50 up with KO, while a ZEN player is up $52. KO is a solid professional system. I say learn KO, then if you still want to upgrade, go for it.
Folks, KO is easy. I was about to "upgrade" to either UBZ or ZEN, but the advice of helpful people here made me rethink. Nothing is easier than KO. I make few mistakes. It's easy and it makes money. I am as new a player as you can get; I had my first counting experience in June of this year. I have made over $3 thousand. To upgrade I will have to expect more error in my play until I can get enough road miles to work out the bugs. Even with a simple system, if you are tired, distracted, or have been playing for hours, you can make mistakes. How many more mistakes you will make in a more difficult system! Is the upgrade worth it? As someone told me, what's the difference if at the end of an hour you are $50 up with KO, while a ZEN player is up $52. KO is a solid professional system. I say learn KO, then if you still want to upgrade, go for it.