Blackjack and Card Counting Forums - BlackjackInfo.com BJInfo Open Source UBZ II V0.5
 Register FAQ Members List Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

#1
July 22nd, 2007, 12:28 AM
 Mimosine Executive Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sunny Southern California Posts: 1,099
BJInfo Open Source UBZ II V0.5

Hey Gang,
In light of recent interest in making a workable UBZII I've slapped together a UBZII variant based on the original UBZII manual, "KO Blackjack," Advice from Fred Renzey and AutoMonkey (see: http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=6666 )

The goal - develop rounded indicies that are easy to use and remember for SD, DD, and 6D games.

the method - common pivot point of 0 which is equal to TC = +2 at all points in the deck. To accomplish the goal -- use different IRCs. To simplify betting and indices we need to develop a Key Count (defined where we first have the advantage) and for V0.5 we will define two additional points; first - "Advantage" where we have a TC on average of +4, and a second upper level "Rogue" where we have a TC on average of +6. These 3 points; KeyCount, Advantage, Rogue will varry based on the number of decks, but also should be very easy to remember and incorporate into play.

Code:
```Tags
2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	 T	 A
1	2	2	2	2	1	0	0	-2	-1```
Initally i'm trying to get these numbers to work for Key Count, Pivot Point, and Advantage:

SD -2, 0, +2
DD -3, 0, +3
6D -6, 0, +6

The Rogue number is still in its infancy.

the Key Count, Advantage, and Rogue numbers very very roughly correlate
to the average TC listed below.

Code:
```             IRC     KeyCount  (P)ivot  (A)dvantage (R)ogue
SD        -4        -2        0         2
DD        -8        -3        0         3
6D       -24        -6        0         6         8
AVG TC       0         1        2         4         6
Bet        1u        2u     1/2 Max   Max bet   2 Hands```

Simplified Index plays, using KO Blackjack as inspiriation:

Take Insurance at +1.

Code:
```	UPCARD
Hand	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	A
17
16								A	K
15									P
14
13	I	I
12	P	P	K	I	K
11										P
10									A	P
9	P					P
8				P	P
10,10				R	R
A,8			R	A```
in All cases the P = 0. "I" will be the IRC (easy enough to remember) K and A represent -x and +x based on the number of decks. e.g. 6D K = -6, A = +6.

The mysterious Rogue value is for the player willing to split 10s, play 2 hands, and double down on A,8 V 4 --- all some of the most risky plays.

I will be developing this further, once I get a simulator, and maybe some feedback. to me this is a logical extension of KO blackjack, that is easy for me to grasp. Looking at Automatic Monkey's Simian Varriant UBZ, or George C's or Fred Renzey's KISS indicies, I'm not quite ready to digest so many different index numbers - thus I'm trying to make a simplified rounded index matrix.

Betting being the most important part of counting, my numbers there too are also a first approximation.

thoughts to get me to a V0.6 ?
#2
July 22nd, 2007, 06:27 AM
 TENNBEAR Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: East Tennessee Posts: 178

Great Work, I think you are on to a unbalaced system that will improve the overall strength in the games with weak penetration.
I am planning to upgrade from KO to UBZEN2 soon.

Last edited by TENNBEAR; July 22nd, 2007 at 06:31 AM.
#3
July 22nd, 2007, 08:57 PM
 Knox Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 301

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Renzey The Count Sytem Performance Comparisons on pg 194 of BJBBII showed the EVs of UBZII to be +0.72% vs. +0.68% for Full Matrix KO. UBZII was tested using the exact format I suggested in my last post. Is that enough to change? A personal call.
My call right now is no, its not worth it. The beauty of KO is it is so incredibly easy. It takes minimal effort. In contrast, counting some cards as 2 points and some as 1 makes my head hurt just thinking about it.

So KO is easy and I get a little bored with it. Fine, I just add some of the additional index plays. Not quite the "Full Matrix KO", but a customized version, with some of my own indices and rounding, that works for me and captures most of the benefit. Chop out a few of the full matrix plays on the high positive and negative extremes and you still have a very easy-to-play yet powerful system.

Be sure to consider the simplicity of a system in which you make virtually no errors versus one more complicated. What will your error rate be? Will you still be able to monitor your surroundings, drink if you choose, chat with the PB, dealer, and ploppies while still having a good time playing?

Don't get me wrong, innovation is a good thing and I wish you well on this endeavor. Just a few things to thing about...
#4
July 22nd, 2007, 10:31 PM
 zengrifter Banned Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: SoCal Posts: 7,400

UBZ-MIMO looks pretty good. I can suggest a few minor improvements -

1. Make the A value the same for 1-2D and then simply Ax2 for 6-8D.
2. Include the R value for 1-2D at +4 and again Rx2 for 6-8D
3. Use R value for certain stiffs also, like maybe 14v10 and 15v9&A (just guessing which ones but you get the idea.)

zg

Ps - I DO recommend splitting 10s!

------------------------------
FROM GRINDER'S WAREHOUSE -
UBZ11, DD, Specific vs Composite Indices
HERE - http://web.archive.org/web/200412211...11ddindice.htm

Last edited by zengrifter; July 22nd, 2007 at 10:34 PM.
#5
August 13th, 2007, 06:57 AM
 nightspirit Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 259

The table shows the index numbers for the conditions Mimosine gave in her post above. They were generated with the help of CVIndex. For DD I don`t know which pen. to use, so I picked 1.4/2. For 6 decks I think 4.75/6 is a good compromise. Would be nice if anybody could take a look on the numbers and validate it. So far I'm not so familiar with the software.

Sims for SD I haven't run so far. Maybe we can use AM numbers.

The next questions raised yet by Mimosine: in which range should we round the index numbers for simplicity? (if the table below is correct) For example, should we round numbers from -3 to +4 to zero (pivot).
And hands like 12 vs. 5, 12 vs. 6, 13 vs. 2 and three simple ignore?

Each column represents a new sim. The Late Surrender indexes were only generated in the last two columns. (The option was checked but I didn't include 15 vs. 9, A and 14 vs.10), so BS calls for LS 16 vs. 9,10,A and 15 vs. 10) I simply forgot about it in the first sims.
#6
August 13th, 2007, 08:14 AM
 Mimosine Executive Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sunny Southern California Posts: 1,099

Quote:
 Originally Posted by nightspirit The table shows the index numbers for the conditions Mimosine gave in her post above. They were generated with the help of CVIndex. For DD I don`t know which pen. to use, so I picked 1.4/2. For 6 decks I think 4.75/6 is a good compromise. Would be nice if anybody could take a look on the numbers and validate it. So far I'm not so familiar with the software.
that would be Mr. Mimosine to you

nevertheless i'm going to generate two strategy tables maybe later today using your sim as a reference. then we can see what the results are using your numbers, my simplified 2 rounded number chart, and a less rounded 5 number chart (with KK, pivot, IRC, Advantage, and Rogue numbers). i suspect they will probably all perform about the same. let's keep up the work on 6D for now, then get cranking on DD.

good work!

edit: P.S. it looks like for insurance decisions the pivot, i.e. 0 (tc = +2) will be perfect for ALL LATE SURRENDER!!! this would be great.

Last edited by Mimosine; August 13th, 2007 at 10:35 AM. Reason: p.s.
#7
August 13th, 2007, 08:20 AM
 Automatic Monkey Banned Join Date: May 2006 Location: Connecticut Posts: 4,537

Great stuff, with the Rogue number. One other thing you might want to add is the opposite of the Rogue number for SD and DD games where you are not Wonging out- a count so low that you are not doubling on 11, hitting a lot more stiffs, not splitting etc. Such indices have value in that they allow you to make the same amount of money while putting less money at risk.
#8
August 13th, 2007, 10:32 AM
 Mimosine Executive Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sunny Southern California Posts: 1,099

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Automatic Monkey Great stuff, with the Rogue number. One other thing you might want to add is the opposite of the Rogue number for SD and DD games where you are not Wonging out- a count so low that you are not doubling on 11, hitting a lot more stiffs, not splitting etc. Such indices have value in that they allow you to make the same amount of money while putting less money at risk.
an excellent suggestion.

i'm sure we will hit you up for your expertise to develop the SD & DD strategy - and will rely heavily on your UBZ-SV. i think starting with 6D is the way to go, as you have already formulated a lot with respect to sd and dd games, while 6D remains largely under-explored and remains the most viable game for someone at my betting level.
#9
August 13th, 2007, 11:05 AM
 Mimosine Executive Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sunny Southern California Posts: 1,099

Rounded Index Numbers for UBZ-OS (Unbalanced Zen - Open Source), 6D along with NightSpirit's numbers. In going for simplicity - one set of numbers for H17 or S17. These are the numbers I plan to sim when possible.

IRC = -24, tags as listed above.

Broken down:
1) Moron - all index plays at RC = 0,
except Insurance which is the most important index play, +4.

2) Simple - all index plays at -6 or +6 (Defined as the KeyCount and Advantage numbers).
Ins = +4
Splitting 10's = +10

3) Full - more complete set of rounded numbers for those inclined. Here we incorporate the IRC, Rogue and the Pivot (RC = 0, TC = +2). So you have 5 numbers to remember -24, -6, 0, +6, +10.

4) UBZ-NS NightSpirit's Sim numbers to a reasonable approximation across all the different games he simmed (e.g. H17, S17).

Code:
```          Moron    Simple        Full    UBZ-NS

INS        4         4         4         4

12 v 2      0         6         6         4
12 v 3      0         -6        0         -3
12 v 4                          -6       -11
12 v 5                         IRC       -24
12 v 6                         IRC       -20
13 v 2                         IRC       -18
13 v 3                         IRC       -27
16 v 9      0         6         10        10
16 v 10      0         -6        -6       -12
15 v 10      0         6         6         6

8 v 5       0         6         6         7
8 v 6       0         -6        0         -1
9 v 2       0         -6        -6        -6
9 v 7       0         6         6         7
10 v 10      0         6         6         7
10 v A      0         6         6         6
11 v A      0         -6        -6        -6

A,8 v 5      0         -6        0         -3
A,8 v 6      0         -6        -6        -7

XX v 5                10        10        11
XX v 6                10        10        10```

i plan on simming these with Powersim, once i read the manual a little more - i probably have to generate a bet spread to get real numbers. I'll probably do a 1-10 spread for all. It will take some time. if someone wants to crank these out using CVCX/CVData please do! i guess i'll also have to sim H17 and S17, but I won't sim LS for the time being.

Last edited by Mimosine; August 13th, 2007 at 11:13 AM.
#10
August 26th, 2007, 11:09 PM
 Mimosine Executive Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sunny Southern California Posts: 1,099

ROUND 1 sims:
Using PowerSim6
Decks: 6
Cards: 312
Players: 4
Shuffle Point: 234
Maximum Rounds per shoe (32767 = infinity): 32767
Burn Cards: 1
Maximum Dealer Rounds (0 = infinity): 0
Holecard(1) or Upcard(0) last: 1
European No Hole Card: 0
Maximum Split Hands: 4
Double After Splits: 1
Resplit Aces: 0
Extra Hits on Split Aces: 0
Double on hard 10 or 11 only: 0
Double on split aces: 0
Dealer hits soft 17: 0
Late Surrender: 0
Pick up hands from Last(1) to first(0): 1
Display hands: 0
Display shoes: 0
Strategy File for Player 1: UBZmoron.str
Strategy File for Player 2: UBZsimple.str
Strategy File for Player 3: UBZfull.str
Strategy File for Player 4: UBZns.str

Tag for 1: -1
Tag for 2: 1
Tag for 3: 2
Tag for 4: 2
Tag for 5: 2
Tag for 6: 2
Tag for 7: 1
Tag for 8: 0
Tag for 9: 0
Tag for 10: -2

Count is unbalanced
Initial Running Count: -24

Bet Spread: -20: 10 -19: 10 -18: 10 -17: 10 -16: 10 -15: 10 -14: 10 -13: 10 -12: 10 -11: 10 -10: 10 -9: 10 -8: 10 -7: 10 -6: 20 -5: 20 -4: 30 -3: 30 -2: 40 -1: 40 0: 50 1: 50 2: 60 3: 60 4: 80 5: 80 6: 100 7: 100 8: 100 9: 100 10: 100 11: 100 12: 100 13: 100 14: 100 15: 100 16: 100 17: 100 18: 100 19: 100 20: 100

Results:

10000000 rounds Bankroll = 10000
1: \$.133445/\$22.2079 = .600889% var = 1539.35 SCORE = 11.56818 ROR = .176616
2: \$.150129/\$22.2079 = .676018% var = 1554.995 SCORE = 14.4944 ROR = .145014
3: \$.152476/\$22.2079 = .686587% var = 1557.115 SCORE = 14.93083 ROR = .141077
4: \$.157337/\$22.2079 = .708475% var = 1550.543 SCORE = 15.96537 ROR = .131408

not very impressive... i don't think.... comments? From the SCORE UBZsimple and UBZfull indicies are pretty good. I need to run this against KO with the same spread to see how it fairs.... var seems HUGE, but i don't really know if it is.... hmmm.

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Forum Rules
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Forums     General     Skilled Play - Card Counting, Advanced Strategies, Game Variations, Theory and Math     Blackjack - Online Casinos     Site Announcements and Administrative Issues Geographic Areas     Las Vegas     Western USA     Midwest USA     Southern USA     Eastern USA     Outside of USA Miscellaneous     Blackjack - CardCounter.com archives

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:45 PM.