Wonging with Unbalanced Count

[BlodiaInc]

I am using Kiss III and know that the walkaway numbers given by Renzey in BBII for a 6 deck shoe is at a RC of 4 or below with 1.5 decks played....

Is it possible to effectively wong in and out with an unbalanced count? How would you go about figuring out the calculations to do so. If you used an unbalanced count with wonging, please help me out... does not have to be specific to Kiss III

 

[Renzey]

I am using Kiss III and know that the walkaway numbers given by Renzey in BBII for a 6 deck shoe is at a RC of 4 or below with 1.5 decks played....

Is it possible to effectively wong in and out with an unbalanced count? How would you go about figuring out the calculations to do so.

With Kiss III, it's really quite easy -- especially for wonging in. Just jump in whenever the RC reaches "20". There, your TC will always be between +1.3 and +1.8 regardless of where in the shoe you are.

For wonging out, you need an understanding of what makes an unbalanced count tick. With Kiss III (and Red 7, but not KO), if the TC remains "0", the RC will rise 2 points for each deck that gets played out. So when you're two decks into the shoe, a neutral RC at that point would be "13". Three decks in it would be "15" and at four decks it would be "17", etc. Get those nembers fixed in your mind:
off the top -- "9"
one deck in -- "11"
two decks in -- "13"
three decks in -- "15"
four decks in -- "17"

Now, say you want to wong out at -1.5 true. Here's the key. Whenever your RC is below "neutral" by 1.5 times the number of remaining decks, the TC is -1.5. So if you're 2.5 decks into the shoe where a neutral count would be "14", since 3.5 decks are left, a -1.5 true count would occur at "9" (8.75).
Using that format, you can prepare a set of wongout numbers to use throughout the shoe.

 

[callipygian]

Get those nembers fixed in your mind:
off the top -- "9"
one deck in -- "11"
two decks in -- "13"
three decks in -- "15"
four decks in -- "17"

If you have to do deck estimation in order to Wong out properly, isn't it easier to use a balanced count?

 

[prankster]

I also use KISS III-I Wong in at 20 or higher-go to the restroom if it seems the count is heading south. Frank Scoblete suggests waiting 'til two decks are dealt, and of course the count be elevated before you Wong in.
I've found Wonging and KISS III work real well together.

 

[BlodiaInc]

With Kiss III, it's really quite easy -- especially for wonging in. Just jump in whenever the RC reaches "20". There, your TC will always be between +1.3 and +1.8 regardless of where in the shoe you are.

For wonging out, you need an understanding of what makes an unbalanced count tick. With Kiss III (and Red 7, but not KO), if the TC remains "0", the RC will rise 2 points for each deck that gets played out. So when you're two decks into the shoe, a neutral RC at that point would be "13". Three decks in it would be "15" and at four decks it would be "17", etc. Get those nembers fixed in your mind:
off the top -- "9"
one deck in -- "11"
two decks in -- "13"
three decks in -- "15"
four decks in -- "17"

Now, say you want to wong out at -1.5 true. Here's the key. Whenever your RC is below "neutral" by 1.5 times the number of remaining decks, the TC is -1.5. So if you're 2.5 decks into the shoe where a neutral count would be "14", since 3.5 decks are left, a -1.5 true count would occur at "9" (8.75).
Using that format, you can prepare a set of wongout numbers to use throughout the shoe.

Wow, Mr. Renzey... thanks for the info... i will be back with my wonging numbers to check in.

 

[Renzey]

If you have to do deck estimation in order to Wong out properly, isn't it easier to use a balanced count?

At that point, they'd both require the same exercise. For unbalanced, you'd have a pre-calculated and pre-memorized set of departure numbers that say, "At 1, 2, 3 and 4 decks in, I'll wong out at an RC of A, B, C and D respectively".
With balanced, to avoid having to determine your TC on the spot, you'd wong out according to the RC in exactly the same way. I lean towards the belief that knowing all these trip points in advance beats re-calculating the same things over and over during play.

 

[zengrifter]

I wonder if KISSI-III is now the most used UB system? zg

 

[eps6724]

I don't trust myself mathematically, so I went with the unbalanced idea (Yes, Kiss III. Oddly enough I learned red7 first, so am comfortable with negative starting numbers, with my pivot coming at 0. Don't ask me...). What I can tell you from my experience, is that when I wong in I usually (O.K., almost ALWAYS) make money. When I wong out I usually make (or, at the least) don't lose much, but when I (for whatever stupid reason enters my pea brained mind) sit through the whole shoe, I don't do nearly as well.

Trust the Kiss III, and wong! I think Rogue has pretty much had the same results.

 

[eps6724]

I wonder if KISSI-III is now the most used UB system? zg

The fact that the author is quick to answer any questions in a helpful, kind way certainly speaks volumes for the ease!

 

[zengrifter]

The fact that the author is quick to answer any questions in a helpful, kind way certainly speaks volumes for the ease!

Right. Hey Fred - you should mention in the Bluebook that you give reader customer service at BJINFO! zg

 

[BlodiaInc]

Does anyone have TC suggestions throughout the shoe for wonging out in the following conditions... I can then calculate the RC numbers and post them:

6-deck, DAS, Late Surrender, H17, 75-85% penetration

 

[callipygian]

Does anyone have TC suggestions throughout the shoe for wonging out in the following conditions...

Wonging out conditions depend heavily on how fast you can find a new game. The faster you expect to find a new game of equal or greater value, the higher out you Wong. The basic question you ask yourself is this, "Is it faster, on average, for me to wait for this game to become desirable, or is it faster to find another table which will give me the exact conditions I'm waiting for?"

For most people, the breakpoints will be between -2 and +2.

 

[Mimosine]

If you have to do deck estimation in order to Wong out properly, isn't it easier to use a balanced count?

no. because for wonging purposes your deck estimation can be off by +/- 20% without a huge penalty. after playing about 10-20 hours you will have a pretty good feel for deck estimation, at least to the level of using it for wonging.

regarding balanced counts: for the sake of bet sizing and index play you need to stare at the discard tray after every round, do some division, figure out the TC, then bet accordingly.

For an unbalanced count this doesn't hold true, the amount of deck estimation you need to do is minimal.

 

[BlodiaInc]

Wonging out conditions depend heavily on how fast you can find a new game. The faster you expect to find a new game of equal or greater value, the higher out you Wong. The basic question you ask yourself is this, "Is it faster, on average, for me to wait for this game to become desirable, or is it faster to find another table which will give me the exact conditions I'm waiting for?"

For most people, the breakpoints will be between -2 and +2.

I am planning to Wong in AND out. I play in locations with only 2 tables but no heat. I am using Kiss III and am going to Wong in at +20 RC as Renzey suggested, but was just wondering if anyone had any experience with any Wong out TC's they were using with unbalanced counts.

 

[sagefr0g]

I am planning to Wong in AND out. I play in locations with only 2 tables but no heat. I am using Kiss III and am going to Wong in at +20 RC as Renzey suggested, but was just wondering if anyone had any experience with any Wong out TC's they were using with unbalanced counts.

a location with only two tables.
aren't you think your gonna stick out like a sore thumb.

 

[callipygian]

for wonging purposes your deck estimation can be off by +/- 20% without a huge penalty

Oh, I see.

regarding balanced counts: for the sake of bet sizing and index play you need to stare at the discard tray after every round, do some division, figure out the TC, then bet accordingly

Looking at the discard tray isn't actually that big of a deal. From first or third base you can't help but stare at it; only in the middle of the table do you have to turn your head to look at it.

And I think being able to do the arithmetic very quickly is one of my strengths. 11 divided by 3.25 is only slightly slower for me than 12 divided by 2.5. The key is that you don't really need to know the exact TC to multiple decimal places; I treat 3.25 as a fraction, so 11/3.25 = 11*4/13 = 44/13 = 3 + 5/13 ~ 3.5. Likewise, 12/2.5 = 12*4/10 = 48/10 = 5 - 2/10 ~ 5.

You just need to know your 13's tables and 17's tables really well. :laugh:

 

[Sonny]

I treat 3.25 as a fraction, so 11/3.25 = 11*4/13 = 44/13 = 3 + 5/13 ~ 3.5.

My math skills aren't nearly as fast as yours so I use simplified shortcuts. For 3.25 I just multiply by 0.3, so 11 * 0.3 = 3.3 which rounds up to 3.5. Piece 'o cake.

Likewise, 12/2.5 = 12*4/10 = 48/10 = 5 - 2/10 ~ 5.

I just multiply by 0.4 for that one, so 12 * 0.4 = 4.8 which rounds up to 5. For some reason my brain has a much better time multiplying instead of dividing.

-Sonny-

 

[Mimosine]

And I think being able to do the arithmetic very quickly is one of my strengths. 11 divided by 3.25 is only slightly slower for me than 12 divided by 2.5. The key is that you don't really need to know the exact TC to multiple decimal places; I treat 3.25 as a fraction, so 11/3.25 = 11*4/13 = 44/13 = 3 + 5/13 ~ 3.5. Likewise, 12/2.5 = 12*4/10 = 48/10 = 5 - 2/10 ~ 5.

i've thought several times about switching to hi/lo from KO or a level 2, ala Zen, knowing that i could do it if i wanted to, but realizing that an unbalanced count is sufficient for my needs. wonging was one of the main reasons why i even considered it, but again in my personal estimate i decided it wasn't worth the effort, instead myself and a few others on here developed some nice wong in points for 6D games, after 1, 2, and 3 decks were gone, and calculated the correct TC for those points, which only needs to be done one time. that thread is buried, but i recall it satisfied me enough so that i didn't have to learn a balanced count

 

[BlodiaInc]

I need some input on a betting spread... I am going to be aggressively wonging in and out of shoes...

Let's say i play off the top, wong out at -1 TC, and wong in at +1.5 TC. I'm using Kiss III, so i have numbers for wong out points throughout the shoe and can wong in at +20 RC generally. Is this too aggressive? What about a betting spread? I am pretty sure although I'm playing in small locations with only 2 tables for blackjack (all the ploppies are playing Spanish 21... need to buy Katarina's book), I'm pretty sure I can get away with wonging aggressively and employing a fairly large spread.

Any suggestions? I'm not too familiar with wonging concepts and don't know how to adjust my numbers depending on how deep I am in the shoe so please give me some insight into that as well. Also, I would be playing off the top, because it seems in my location/conditions, it would be less suspicious then backcounting/waiting and then wonging in.