K-O Key Count Vs. Pivot

[robcasell]

What is the real difference between the Key Count and Pivot. Based on their definitions in the book, they are fairly redundant. What should I be using them for? Hoping someone could provide some more clarification.

Pivot - When we have reliable information about our advantage and content of remaining deck

Key Count - At or above which we have an advantage

 

[Canceler]

Key Count - At or above which we have an advantage

This is where you first start to have an advantage, and where you should start increasing your bet.

Pivot - When we have reliable information about our advantage and content of remaining deck

What I know about the pivot point:

According to the book, it’s where you should have your maximum bet out.

It’s exactly equal to a Hi-Lo true count of +4.


What I don’t know about the pivot point:

Why it’s called that.

What is doing the pivoting, and pivoting from what to what.

What the book means by the definition they give.

(Luckily, I don’t need to know that stuff to use the system!)

 

[robcasell]

This is where you first start to have an advantage, and where you should start increasing your bet.


What I know about the pivot point:

According to the book, it’s where you should have your maximum bet out.

It’s exactly equal to a Hi-Lo true count of +4.

Your description makes sense. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[k_c]

This is where you first start to have an advantage, and where you should start increasing your bet.


What I know about the pivot point:

According to the book, it’s where you should have your maximum bet out.

It’s exactly equal to a Hi-Lo true count of +4.


What I don’t know about the pivot point:

Why it’s called that.

What is doing the pivoting, and pivoting from what to what.

What the book means by the definition they give.

(Luckily, I don’t need to know that stuff to use the system!)

At the KO pivot the number of low cards (2-7) remaining to be dealt is exactly equal to the number of high cards (T-A) remaining to be dealt. Someone who was true counting KO would have a running count of 0 (& true count = 0) at the pivot.

KO pivot is comparable to Hi-Lo true count = +4 but not identical. Hi-Lo is measuring the imbalance of 2-6 vs T-A whereas KO is measuring imbalance of 2-7 vs T-A.

An example of the slight difference is hard 14 vs up card of 10. Probability of drawing a 7 makes a difference here. Hi-Lo would have no index for 14 vs 10 because 7s are not counted in Hi-Lo and on average it is better to hit rather than stand no matter how high true count is (unless sevens are side counted.) On the other hand KO would have an index for 14 vs 10 since a high count indicates probability of drawing a 7 is reduced. A quick infinite shoe estimate indicates a KO true count index of about +4 or +5 for hard 14 vs 10. (KO TC of +4 would be a relatively rare occurrence.)

 

[revrac]

This is where you first start to have an advantage, and where you should start increasing your bet.


What I know about the pivot point:

According to the book, it’s where you should have your maximum bet out.

It’s exactly equal to a Hi-Lo true count of +4.


What I don’t know about the pivot point:

Why it’s called that.

What is doing the pivoting, and pivoting from what to what.

What the book means by the definition they give.

(Luckily, I don’t need to know that stuff to use the system!)

While i don't know for sure why its called the "pivot point" i can assume it can be called that for several of the reasons below.

1. It is the one point that no matter how many cards or decks have been played or remaining has the exact same expectation. For example, if 4 cards have been played and your count is now +4 you have the same expected value as if you had a count of +4 and 4 decks out of 6 decks have been played. It is the only point at which can claim that. For example, +2 is worth a lot more near the beginning of a shoe than the end of a shoe. These running counts assume you use the standard running counts in the KO book. (edit: Just noticed but this is pretty much saying the same thing as above about number of 2-7's and 10-A's in a different way)

2. It is the point at which you pivot, as in change direction, from small bet, to max bet.

3. It is a pivotal point to remember, as now you put out max bet.

 

[Canceler]

At the KO pivot the number of low cards (2-7) remaining to be dealt is exactly equal to the number of high cards (T-A) remaining to be dealt.

This gets my vote as to why it’s called the pivot point. I never thought of that before.

But it’s not really pivotal, at least as far as advantage is concerned. Advantage starts at the key count, well before the pivot point. Some new KO users question why you should have an advantage while the small cards still outnumber the big cards. My answer to that would be to shrug, and say, “That’s the way it is.” Are there any better answers?

KO pivot is comparable to Hi-Lo true count = +4 but not identical. Hi-Lo is measuring the imbalance of 2-6 vs T-A whereas KO is measuring imbalance of 2-7 vs T-A.

All right, with the KO count at the pivot point, if you back out an average of 4 sevens per deck counted, you will mathematically get a TC of +4.
BUT yes, the sevens were counted, and there may not have been exactly 4 of them per deck. Without getting into the vagaries of any count that gives the same value to more than one rank of cards, I’ll concede that point.

 

[k_c]

This gets my vote as to why it’s called the pivot point. I never thought of that before.

But it’s not really pivotal, at least as far as advantage is concerned. Advantage starts at the key count, well before the pivot point. Some new KO users question why you should have an advantage while the small cards still outnumber the big cards. My answer to that would be to shrug, and say, “That’s the way it is.” Are there any better answers?

The advantage at the KO pivot is positive and tends to be pretty consistent. The source of this advantage is that there is an equal number of low (2-7) cards and high (T-A) cards remaining to be dealt. Instead of the ratio of low/high being 6/5 as it is for a full shoe it is 1/1. Even if KO is being used in unbalanced mode where initial running count is defined as something other than -4*decks a KO counter knows what the pivot is by simply evaluating the expression 4*decks + IRC.

The key count is where player first has an advantage. If KO is true counted then it's possible to arrive at a fairly consistent value for that also. However when KO is used in unbalanced mode then the key count becomes a statistical value representing an average of what running count is when player first has an advantage. In unbalanced mode a statistical key count tends to undervalue advantage early in a shoe and overvalue advantage late in the shoe.

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=35.

 

[THE SALMON]

For me for a 6 deck shoe game it makes sense to mike the IRC (Initial Running Count) -16. That way at the time to be increasing your bet units your running count number gives you a clue if how many units to be adding. The count will be around +1, +2, +3, +4, +5, etc. Leaving you with less thinking about approximately the number of units to be betting.
The less numbers I have to think about while doing the running count the better.
Does this concept make sense to anyone here?
SALMON

 

[Tuck]

I understand what you are getting at. For me it would not really seem simplify the system since you are using negative numbers from the start. But if it makes it easier for you at the tables, then by all means go for it. Just be sure to adjust your deviations accordingly. For example: you will now be taking insurance at +7 instead of +3