KO Blackjack review from Amazon

[JAXBOY]

I was checking out the reviews of KO Blackjack and ran into this review.

Can someone please counter what this reviewer is saying.

Anyways I already ordered the book and Casino Verite. I'll wait till the BJnet guys are back to get Smartcards.

By A Kittle

Let's assume your playing in a 6-deck game. This system has you start your running count at -20, with -4 or higher as the "key" (The point at which you bet high). Using the KO method, after all of the decks are counted through the count will be +4. Does anyone else see the flaw here? Let's say you have a count of -3. This system tells you to bet high (Even suggesting 10 betting units!). But think about it, if a deck completely counted through will end up at +4, then there's a better chance that you'll be drawing low cards, meaning the dealer actually has the advantage. Put simply, if you use this system YOU WILL BE BETTING HIGH WHEN THE DEALER HAS THE ADVANTAGE. If I'm wrong then correct me, please. But I believe this is a very faulty system. If you win anything using it, count it off as luck. Eventually it will ruin you.

 

[ScottH]

I was checking out the reviews of KO Blackjack and ran into this review.

Can someone please counter what this reviewer is saying.

Anyways I already ordered the book and Casino Verite. I'll wait till the BJnet guys are back to get Smartcards.

By A Kittle

Let's assume your playing in a 6-deck game. This system has you start your running count at -20, with -4 or higher as the "key" (The point at which you bet high). Using the KO method, after all of the decks are counted through the count will be +4. Does anyone else see the flaw here? Let's say you have a count of -3. This system tells you to bet high (Even suggesting 10 betting units!). But think about it, if a deck completely counted through will end up at +4, then there's a better chance that you'll be drawing low cards, meaning the dealer actually has the advantage. Put simply, if you use this system YOU WILL BE BETTING HIGH WHEN THE DEALER HAS THE ADVANTAGE. If I'm wrong then correct me, please. But I believe this is a very faulty system. If you win anything using it, count it off as luck. Eventually it will ruin you.

At the end of ONE deck you will be at +4, so at the end of the 6 deck shoe you should be at +24, assuming you start counting from 0.

It's not a faulty system, just a faulty review! Get the book and you'll see.

 

[ScottH]

Using the KO method, after all of the decks are counted through the count will be +4. Does anyone else see the flaw here? Let's say you have a count of -3. This system tells you to bet high (Even suggesting 10 betting units!). But think about it, if a deck completely counted through will end up at +4, then there's a better chance that you'll be drawing low cards, meaning the dealer actually has the advantage. Put simply, if you use this system YOU WILL BE BETTING HIGH WHEN THE DEALER HAS THE ADVANTAGE. If I'm wrong then correct me, please. But I believe this is a very faulty system. If you win anything using it, count it off as luck. Eventually it will ruin you.

Here's your problem. You start counting from a NEGATIVE number, so when you place a max bet at +4 you are actually at a higher running count than +4. For example, in a single deck game you start counting from -4.

 

[QFIT]

Look up Mein Kampf on Amazon and you will see numerous rave reviews. That doesn't mean Hitler was right. Anyone can write an Amazon review making the feature worse than useless.

 

[Mikeaber]

Here's your problem. You start counting from a NEGATIVE number, so when you place a max bet at +4 you are actually at a higher running count than +4. For example, in a single deck game you start counting from -4.

Actually Scott, you start -4 with double deck and 0 with Single deck. KC is +1 for Double Deck and +2 for Single.

 

[supercoolmancool]

Here's your problem. You start counting from a NEGATIVE number, so when you place a max bet at +4 you are actually at a higher running count than +4. For example, in a single deck game you start counting from -4.

Actually you start at zero for a single deck game and -4 for a two deck game. The problem is that he is confusing running count with true count. But yah you can definately be betting high when the dealer has the advantage because it is an unbalanced system. However +4 running count is also the true count +4 and that is when you bet your max bet.

 

[ScottH]

Actually Scott, you start -4 with double deck and 0 with Single deck. KC is +1 for Double Deck and +2 for Single.

My mistake. I'm used to -4 since I have been practicing double deck!

 

[ScottH]

Actually you start at zero for a single deck game and -4 for a two deck game. The problem is that he is confusing running count with true count. But yah you can definately be betting high when the dealer has the advantage because it is an unbalanced system. However +4 running count is also the true count +4 and that is when you bet your max bet.

You won't be betting more than the minimum at a disadvantage. You're only betting high when you have the advantage. You just can't be sure how great the advantage is until you hit +4.

 

[supercoolmancool]

You won't be betting more than the minimum at a disadvantage. You're only betting high when you have the advantage. You just can't be sure how great the advantage is until you hit +4.

I agree now that you do always have the advantage at the key count. He just doesn't understand why the key count is at -4 when at the end of the deck the count is at +4. I think someone said that all the key counts are determined by computer simulation.

 

[ScottH]

I agree now that you do always have the advantage at the key count. He just doesn't understand why the key count is at -4 when at the end of the deck the count is at +4. I think someone said that all the key counts are determined by computer simulation.

Maybe he will figure it out after reading the book. He really doesn't understand how KO works, so he was a little premature to say, "Put simply, if you use this system YOU WILL BE BETTING HIGH WHEN THE DEALER HAS THE ADVANTAGE. If I'm wrong then correct me, please. But I believe this is a very faulty system. If you win anything using it, count it off as luck. Eventually it will ruin you."

 

[Mikeaber]

There were two less than favorable reviews. One from this guy y'all are talking about who doesn't know how Unbalanced systems work (nor apparently, the difference between running count and true count.) The other was from a guy who just didn't like the way the book was presented (the format of the book.)

I think that were I Vancura or Fuchs, or Don Schlesinger who also endorsed the accuracy of KO in "Blackjack Attack", or Ken Smith who sells only those books he has endorsed, I might think about trying to set the record straight. But then again, these guys are obviously not very experienced Advantage Players.

 

[Doc]

I think you are dismissing the objection a bit prematurely.

The reviewer is confused (and so am I), because KO starts with a -4 running count for two decks and uses +1 running count as the key. If you were to start with -4 running count and deal the entire two decks out, you would end up with a running count of +4, which is above the key count of +1. This appears as though it would call for a large bet (if using KO Rookie) at times when you have no greater advantage than that with which you began. Please correct any misunderstanding I have with regard to the numbers.

I use the Red Seven Count as presented in Arnold Snyder's Blackbelt in BlackJack. It makes more sense to me, as the starting running count for two decks is -4, the pivot is 0, and when you come to the end of two decks, your running count is 0, so when your count is above the pivot, more smaller value cards have been dealt than higher value cards. Why is KO not organized in this fashion? It seems like it would make more sense to me if KO began with a starting count of -8 for two decks and your pivot were 0 (or any other arbitrary number eight units higher than your starting count). Can someone please explain the difference to me?

I ordered KO Blackjack, and the book should arrive within the next couple of days, so maybe that will clear everything up. If able, I would appreciate it if you could reference any specific pages that may clear this up for me. Thanks in advance.

 

[ScottH]

The reviewer is confused (and so am I), because KO starts with a -4 running count for two decks and uses +1 running count as the key. If you were to start with -4 running count and deal the entire two decks out, you would end up with a running count of +4, which is above the key count of +1. This appears as though it would call for a large bet (if using KO Rookie) at times when you have no greater advantage than that with which you began. Please correct any misunderstanding I have with regard to the numbers.

I use the Red Seven Count as presented in Arnold Snyder's Blackbelt in BlackJack. It makes more sense to me, as the starting running count for two decks is -4, the pivot is 0, and when you come to the end of two decks, your running count is 0, so when your count is above the pivot, more smaller value cards have been dealt than higher value cards. Why is KO not organized in this fashion? It seems like it would make more sense to me if KO began with a starting count of -8 for two decks and your pivot were 0 (or any other arbitrary number eight units higher than your starting count). Can someone please explain the difference to me?

I ordered KO Blackjack, and the book should arrive within the next couple of days, so maybe that will clear everything up. If able, I would appreciate it if you could reference any specific pages that may clear this up for me. Thanks in advance.

A lot of people's questions can be answered be answered by simply reading the book. It's probably a good idea to read the book and then ask for any clarification on what you don't understand. It's only about 100 pages, so it shouldn't take long to read.