what count should a new player use

kewljason

Well-Known Member
#1
Rarely a week goes by that we don't see a 'newbie' asked a question about what count to use. I am absolutely stunned at any answer that suggests anything but hi-lo or a similar level 1 count.

In my recent poll of players that identify themselves as professional with the majority of their income coming from blackjack play, roughly half play hi-lo or another level one count. (and I thank the participants) It is a small sampling, but it roughly coincides with the number of players identifying as professional in my 'percentage of income' poll a while back as well as Ken's poll of yearly earnings, so unforetuanatly that is about the number we have to work with.

Even this small sampling should completely eliminate the argument that a player can not make serious money with a level 1 count like hi-lo. No, it doesn't answer the ongoing debate of just how much additional value a higher level count is really worth in the real world of play as opposed to simulations. That is still a matter worthy of discussion, that a player may want to consider later on down the road. But a player identifying as new, should not be concerned with that. A new player should pick one of the simple level one counts such as hi-lo and learn it thoroughly, play it for a period of time and understand all aspects of it before considering a move up in count. A new player trying to learn a higher level count is like trying to learn to run before you learn to walk. And quite frankly even a player who doesn't identify as a new player but asks this question in one of its many forms, isn't ready to move up in count. If you are really ready for that step, you will know it and you will be able to answer the question of if its even worth it to you or not.

So as a group, lets stop the disservice of encouraging new players to jump to these level 2 and 3 counts and go back to the thought process of 'starting at the beginning'.
:)
 

Friendo

Well-Known Member
#2
I'd back this

Exactly.

High-low for those comfortable with TC conversion.

K-O, KISS3, or Red 7 for those who aren't.

Any of these will get the money just fine.

Somebody forced me to play, say, K-O for the rest of my career, even if I were pro, I would do so happily.
 

Eye of the Tiger

Well-Known Member
#3
kewljason said:
Rarely a week goes by that we don't see a 'newbie' asked a question about what count to use. I am absolutely stunned at any answer that suggests anything but hi-lo or a similar level 1 count.

In my recent poll of players that identify themselves as professional with the majority of their income coming from blackjack play, roughly half play hi-lo or another level one count. (and I thank the participants) It is a small sampling, but it roughly coincides with the number of players identifying as professional in my 'percentage of income' poll a while back as well as Ken's poll of yearly earnings, so unforetuanatly that is about the number we have to work with.

Even this small sampling should completely eliminate the argument that a player can not make serious money with a level 1 count like hi-lo. No, it doesn't answer the ongoing debate of just how much additional value a higher level count is really worth in the real world of play as opposed to simulations. That is still a matter worthy of discussion, that a player may want to consider later on down the road. But a player identifying as new, should not be concerned with that. A new player should pick one of the simple level one counts such as hi-lo and learn it thoroughly, play it for a period of time and understand all aspects of it before considering a move up in count. A new player trying to learn a higher level count is like trying to learn to run before you learn to walk. And quite frankly even a player who doesn't identify as a new player but asks this question in one of its many forms, isn't ready to move up in count. If you are really ready for that step, you will know it and you will be able to answer the question of if its even worth it to you or not.

So as a group, lets stop the disservice of encouraging new players to jump to these level 2 and 3 counts and go back to the thought process of 'starting at the beginning'.
:)
I know from reading your post's that you use Hi-Lo. How come you don't use a level 2 count? Not worth the trouble for the few extra pennies ?
 

kewljason

Well-Known Member
#4
Friendo said:
Exactly.

Somebody forced me to play, say, K-O for the rest of my career, even if I were pro, I would do so happily.
Yes, along that same though wave, at least a couple highly respected, longtime, players who both played a level 2 count most of their carreer, in both cases in was RPC, (I know one studied under revere, maybe both) which seemed more popular back in the day, have told me if they had it to do all over again, they would have stuck with hi-lo. Neither of these guys played blackjack exclusively for a living, but both are very respected BJ authors. I don't want to speak for them so I won't use there names. They can chime in if they wish, although one doesn't particpate on this site. :rolleyes:
 
#5
I agree with the premise that almost everyone is best served starting with a level 1 count. Their ability to master a side count is an important consideration in what level 1 count is best for them. They should master counting before attempting a side count. This makes a level 1 that includes aces as the best choice to start.

Different regions of the country offer different playable games as the number 1 choice. The east you should learn a count strong in shoe games. Counts better suited for pitch games may be the better choice in other regions. Basically where the person intends to gamble may determine what game they should plan to exploit. That would in turn influence the decision on which level 1 count best suits their needs.

If they have a real problem with true count conversion an unbalanced count may be their best fit. You can give away all your advantage and then some by overestimating the true count.

I am not sure how good a universal fit HILO is. The best fit question is better left to someone else as it pertains to different games and individual needs.
 

Eye of the Tiger

Well-Known Member
#6
kewljason said:
Yes, along that same though wave, at least a couple highly respected, longtime, players who both played a level 2 count most of their carreer, in both cases in was RPC, (I know one studied under revere, maybe both) which seemed more popular back in the day, have told me if they had it to do all over again, they would have stuck with hi-lo. Neither of these guys played blackjack exclusively for a living, but both are very respected BJ authors. I don't want to speak for them so I won't use there names. They can chime in if they wish, although one doesn't particpate on this site. :rolleyes:
Is a level 2 count to stressful on the person?
 

kewljason

Well-Known Member
#7
Eye of the Tiger said:
I know from reading your post's that you use Hi-Lo. How come you don't use a level 2 count? Not worth the trouble for the few extra pennies ?
I started with hi-lo 7 years ago and after a couple years moved to a level 2 count, the sort of antiquated RPC, which I played for a period of 18 months, before reverting back to hi-lo. It wasn't that I couldn't learn RPC, I did and was able to play it effectively. But I did feel like it was just slightly more taxing on me and didn't feel like I was benefitting much by it, so I reverted back to hi-lo, which I truely believe is nearly as effective in real life play and with the simplicity of it can be a building block to other advanced techniques like side counts and ST, neither of which I have taken full advantage of. :eek:

It probably seems like I am pushing hi-lo, and that really isn't my intent. :cool:
 

Coyote

Well-Known Member
#8
I would think that anyone that has a passion for learning to count will gather as much information as possible on the different types of counting methods and choose the one that is best for them regardless of what others suggest. I do agree it is easier to a novice to walk before they run. I couldn't imagine trying to deal with a level 2 or 3 at a table going heads up and being new to the game.
 

Eye of the Tiger

Well-Known Member
#9
kewljason said:
I started with hi-lo 7 years ago and after a couple years moved to a level 2 count, the sort of antiquated RPC, which I played for a period of 18 months, before reverting back to hi-lo. It wasn't that I couldn't learn RPC, I did and was able to play it effectively. But I did feel like it was just slightly more taxing on me and didn't feel like I was benefitting much by it, so I reverted back to hi-lo, which I truely believe is nearly as effective in real life play and with the simplicity of it can be a building block to other advanced techniques like side counts and ST, neither of which I have taken full advantage of. :eek:

It probably seems like I am pushing hi-lo, and that really isn't my intent. :cool:
That's the way i feel about it also. Somethings that are suppose to work on paper just don't work in real life. I truly like to keep things simple.
 

newbctr

Well-Known Member
#10
Jason, you are making way too much of the debate. Hi-Lo gets you 97% of the benefit possible, and is particularly strong in the 6 deck game where the betting decisions are what drives profits. If you want to squeeze the extra 3%, then play for 90 seconds longer or drop the TC for your max bet by 0.2... but it's not worthy of a long debate.

I use Hi-Lo, and as you have seen, it has worked extremely well for me in my first year. As a matter of fact, I picked up another 70 units this weekend :)

Headed to Vegas this week.... you want to grab a drink buddy?
 
#11
kewljason said:
Yes, along that same though wave, at least a couple highly respected, longtime, players who both played a level 2 count most of their carreer, in both cases in was RPC, (I know one studied under revere, maybe both) which seemed more popular back in the day, have told me if they had it to do all over again, they would have stuck with hi-lo. Neither of these guys played blackjack exclusively for a living, but both are very respected BJ authors. I don't want to speak for them so I won't use there names. They can chime in if they wish, although one doesn't particpate on this site. :rolleyes:
A lot of shoe players use RPC, and one of the best things about it is that the parameters are so good it preempts the temptation to try a more complicated count! It gets you no more than 5-10% over High-Low, and stronger counts will get you maybe a few percent over RPC. But there's really no place to go after that with counting.

Another nice thing about RPC is it is very similar to High-Low, so if you are working with a High-Low player you can just cut all your numbers in half and you'll be reasonably close to what the other guy has. I'd feel perfectly good about dividing my RPC running count by 2 and passing the information to a High-Low player and letting him take it from there.
 

Friendo

Well-Known Member
#12
newbctr said:
If you want to squeeze the extra 3%, then play for 90 seconds longer or drop the TC for your max bet by 0.2...
This argument appears everywhere, including Blackjack Attack III and the writings of many people far more experienced than I.

That said, I have a problem with the argument. If the extra 1.5 minutes would make the difference, then the extra 1.5 minutes with the stronger count would get you even more.

There is the fatigue factor with a higher level count - I was reminded of that this evening at the tables - but, still, the better count will get you that extra percentage edge if you can hold it together during the long stretches.

I do like MathProf's point, from the other board, that higher-level counts tend to slow one down, and thereby erase the edge.
 
#13
A "newbs" perspective

I'm new to the board and have dedicated the last four weeks of my life learning hi-lo and gobbling up all the info I can about AP. From a "newbs" perspective on counting I will have to agree with Kewl Jason. It was hard enough learning to count down a deck of cards in less than 20 seconds, but it was even hard to apply what I learned in a real world condition with noise people talking, plopps yelling at you for deviating from the bible (BS)... it was enough to make you go crazy.

I'm obviously no expert yet, but I've had all the proper tools at my side. Since it's all fresh to me because I just started I thought I'd give my opinion.

1. It definitely helps to have a mathematical background. It has helped me understand the reasoning behind alot of the departures from BS.
2. Practice Practice Practice. Putting in the hours at home definitely will prepare one for the real world. Count down decks at home and make sure you can do it quickly. The first two days I was lousy. Don't be discouraged. I can now do a deck in under 20 seconds.
3. Hi-Lo FTW (imho). There obviously exists more effective counting strategies but at the cost of more mental power and trust me it will wear on you when your playing. When just starting off.. it's more important to use a technique that is easy to learn and easy to apply. The hardest part of Hi-Lo for me to get was deck estimation and dividing but as one learns later a 1/2 deck error in estimation isn't too bad of an error.. very little in fact. Oh and learn what the Illustrious 18/Sweet 16/Fab four are ;)
4. Read, read, read... there are sooooo many resources at your fingertips it's amazing. Take caution tho, make sure that your sources are legitimate and coming from a respected source.
5. If you can afford it do yourself a favor and purchase QFIT's CV suite.. I am a bit more serious about BJ as side income so it was a no brainer for me. I love running simulations and doing research on indices to refine for the games I play so I have fun with it. But the Blackjack program alone is great because it allows you to simulate a real blackjack game and will correct mistakes for you while your playing. A wonderful tool.. Put in about 10 hours or so playing on that and your confidence will boost!
6. READ THIS "Modern Blackjack" . Omgness what a treasure chest of wonderful information. After reading his chapters on "How Blackjack Works" it all made so much more sense. He offers a ton of practical advice and it's not all boring he's got a ton of great stories to go along with his studies. Plus TONS of graphs and pictures to help explain ideas. Plus it's FREE!

Those are just a few things off the top of my head.
Thank you all on the forum, I have found an invaluable place online to share ideas, stories and ask questions.

May the variance be with you! :cool:
 
#14
to newbies

Im sure with your diligence you know this but for other new counters. Over estimating the TC is a disaster. It is worst when using your indices for play BS modification. Round all estimations to fall on the side of conservative hand play. When betting this system wide error raises RoR sharply.
 
Last edited:
#16
tthree said:
Im sure with your diligence you know this but for other new counters. Over estimating the TC is a disaster. It is worst when using your indices for play BS modification. Round all estimations to fall on the side of conservative hand play. When betting this system wide error raises RoR sharply.
Your absolutely right.. I forgot to mention that I play pitch games primarily DD so deck estimation is much easier.. For six+ decks there is higher variance due to error... the CV Blackjack program actually has a drill for deck estimation! awesome stuff.. any aspiring counter should download the demo at the minimal... (the demo is crippled but still most of the functions work).
 
#17
link please

do you have a link for the demo. This is always my biggest worry so I may overcompensate. Better confidence would help my bottom line if it didnt cause the error.
 
Top