KO or Renzey?

[shadroch]

Ok,I"ve got BS down pat-100% on the Hit and Stand game ten times in a row,270 out of 274 on the other on-line trainer five straight times(all errors being hitting the wrong key,not mistakes, and I can count a deck down using hi-lo in under 40 seconds( improving weekly).
I'm torn between learning KO or Renzys KISS.Both seem easy and expandable.

Which of these two would you recommend,and why?
Or is there another system I should look at,as well?

 

[ScottH]

Ok,I"ve got BS down pat-100% on the Hit and Stand game ten times in a row,270 out of 274 on the other on-line trainer five straight times(all errors being hitting the wrong key,not mistakes, and I can count a deck down using hi-lo in under 40 seconds( improving weekly).
I'm torn between learning KO or Renzys KISS.Both seem easy and expandable.

Which of these two would you recommend,and why?
Or is there another system I should look at,as well?

As far as I know they are both pretty close to the same thing. I don't think either one would be any harder to learn.

The one thing is that there is more people playing KO so you could probably find more help using KO.

 

[TENNBEAR]

Which of these two would you recommend,and why?
Or is there another system I should look at,as well?

I too recommend KO because of it being so simple, but it really makes little difference. Once you mastered counting accuratly and consentently in a casino enviroment with one system, changing to another system will be a breeze.

 

[sagefr0g]

Ok,I"ve got BS down pat-100% on the Hit and Stand game ten times in a row,270 out of 274 on the other on-line trainer five straight times(all errors being hitting the wrong key,not mistakes, and I can count a deck down using hi-lo in under 40 seconds( improving weekly).
I'm torn between learning KO or Renzys KISS.Both seem easy and expandable.

Which of these two would you recommend,and why?
Or is there another system I should look at,as well?

i find hi/o easier than the unbalanced systems such as KO, KISS and Red 7 .
if you can divide in your head by five, four, three and two then hi/lo really isn't so difficult.
i believe studies have show hi/lo is a bit more powerful.
the bulk of the literature Griffin, Schlesinger, Wong, May, Revere, Humble & Cooper and even Vancura & Fuchs, Snyder and Renzy works seem to always use it as a referance point.
just my opinion your mileage may vary.
best regards,
mr fr0g

 

[nc-tom]

Ok,I"ve got BS down pat-100% on the Hit and Stand game ten times in a row,270 out of 274 on the other on-line trainer five straight times(all errors being hitting the wrong key,not mistakes, and I can count a deck down using hi-lo in under 40 seconds( improving weekly).
I'm torn between learning KO or Renzys KISS.Both seem easy and expandable.

Which of these two would you recommend,and why?
Or is there another system I should look at,as well?

Well shadroch as other posters have mentioned there is not to much difference. As for myself having started out with the hi-lo and then switching to the red 7 ( dont play enough to stay sharp adjusting from RC to TC) i have recently switched to the kiss 3. For some reason I just find it easier counting the black 2 as a + card than counting any other number in a unbalanced system.Will still use hi-lo once in a while when playing single deck.

 

[ScottH]

i find hi/o easier than the unbalanced systems such as KO, KISS and Red 7 .
if you can divide in your head by five, four, three and two then hi/lo really isn't so difficult.
i believe studies have show hi/lo is a bit more powerful.
the bulk of the literature Griffin, Schlesinger, Wong, May, Revere, Humble & Cooper and even Vancura & Fuchs, Snyder and Renzy works seem to always use it as a referance point.
just my opinion your mileage may vary.
best regards,
mr fr0g

Hi-Lo and KO are VERY close in strenth. With an occasional TC error using Hi-L0, KO will be equal if not better than Hi-Lo.

 

[shadroch]

Hi-Lo and KO are VERY close in strenth. With an occasional TC error using Hi-L0, KO will be equal if not better than Hi-Lo.

My thoughts on staying away from Hi-Lo is that you need to be very good at estimating decks played,and remaining.As I'll be playing a good bit in AC,that means working with 8 decks.Unbalanced counts seem like they are more beginner friendly.

 

[Cass]

Ok,I"ve got BS down pat-100% on the Hit and Stand game ten times in a row,270 out of 274 on the other on-line trainer five straight times(all errors being hitting the wrong key,not mistakes, and I can count a deck down using hi-lo in under 40 seconds( improving weekly).
I'm torn between learning KO or Renzys KISS.Both seem easy and expandable.

Which of these two would you recommend,and why?
Or is there another system I should look at,as well?

Both systems are close in performance. I've been using Kiss since I started. I like the fact that you dont have to deal with negative running counts and true counts. You are always dealing with positive numbers and you always up your bet at a count of "20". Very simple.

 

[bnoc848]

id say go with the red7, i have the KO book too but i find the KO count alot harder than the red7 and there very clos ein performance.

 

[ScottH]

id say go with the red7, i have the KO book too but i find the KO count alot harder than the red7 and there very clos ein performance.

KO and Red7 are virtually identical in ease of learning, in my opinion.

 

[sagefr0g]

My thoughts on staying away from Hi-Lo is that you need to be very good at estimating decks played,and remaining.As I'll be playing a good bit in AC,that means working with 8 decks.Unbalanced counts seem like they are more beginner friendly.

you have a point there. i have various number of decks scatter about my home so that i keep familiar with what a given number of decks looks like. then also some hi/lo player get even more technical by going to half decks and even quarter decks when determining the true count. deck estimation is one thing that comes relatively easy for me for some reason. it funny too that it does because my eye sight has gotten pretty poor with age. :sad:
before i decided to go with hi/lo it was a toss up for me between red 7 and ko but then i hadn't learned about KISS then either.
best regards,
mr fr0g

 

[ScottH]

you have a point there. i have various number of decks scatter about my home so that i keep familiar with what a given number of decks looks like. then also some hi/lo player get even more technical by going to half decks and even quarter decks when determining the true count. deck estimation is one thing that comes relatively easy for me for some reason. it funny too that it does because my eye sight has gotten pretty poor with age. :sad:
before i decided to go with hi/lo it was a toss up for me between red 7 and ko but then i hadn't learned about KISS then either.
best regards,
mr fr0g

Since KISS and KO are so similar it's probably best to go with KO since it's more popular, so you can get more information on it. That's just my opinion. You really can't go wrong going with any of those 3 systems. They are similar enough that you can easily switch to another one if you change your mind as well.

 

[sagefr0g]

Hi-Lo and KO are VERY close in strenth. With an occasional TC error using Hi-L0, KO will be equal if not better than Hi-Lo.

Arnold Snyder in Blackbelt in Blackjack has a table showing comparative winrates for red 7 using six indices and hi/lo using 34 indices for a four deck game 75% pen vegas strip rules 1-10 spread.
red 7 had winrate = .77%
hi/lo had winrate = .87%
Snyder further states that Knock-Out Blackjack contained computer simulations that showed KO was more powerful than red 7 and just about any other counting system. he further claims the authors of Knock-Out Blackjack had made some major errors in their simulation methods. Snyder further states that John Auston author of Blackjack Risk Manager had provided extensive computer simulation that compared the winrates of ko, red7 and hi/lo showing that showing that both red7 and hi/lo outperformed ko.
John May in Get the Edge at Blackjack has a count system comparison table that shows the following information about ko, red7 and hi/lo
hi/lo play effic .51 bet effic .97 insur effic .76
red 7 and ko play effic .54 bet effic .98 insur effic .78
these were the arguements that i considered when i made my decision but what really tipped it for me is that i just found hi/lo simpler (for me) and that the literature as a whole always seemed to revolve about it.
best regards,
mr fr0g

 

[ScottH]

Arnold Snyder in Blackbelt in Blackjack has a table showing comparative winrates for red 7 using six indices and hi/lo using 34 indices for a four deck game 75% pen vegas strip rules 1-10 spread.
red 7 had winrate = .77%
hi/lo had winrate = .87%
Snyder further states that Knock-Out Blackjack contained computer simulations that showed KO was more powerful than red 7 and just about any other counting system. he further claims the authors of Knock-Out Blackjack had made some major errors in their simulation methods. Snyder further states that John Auston author of Blackjack Risk Manager had provided extensive computer simulation that compared the winrates of ko, red7 and hi/lo showing that showing that both red7 and hi/lo outperformed ko.
John May in Get the Edge at Blackjack has a count system comparison table that shows the following information about ko, red7 and hi/lo
hi/lo play effic .51 bet effic .97 insur effic .76
red 7 and ko play effic .54 bet effic .98 insur effic .78
these were the arguements that i considered when i made my decision but what really tipped it for me is that i just found hi/lo simpler (for me) and that the literature as a whole always seemed to revolve about it.
best regards,
mr fr0g

If you actually find Hi-Lo easier than KO than that's great! But I think the large majority of learning counters will be much better suited going with KO. I'm assuming MOST people would think KO is easier. I think that a new counter should take a good look at several different counts before making the commitment to learn one.

I'm just having a hard time thinking about how Hi-Lo could be easier than KO. Hi-Lo is pretty much KO minus the true count adjustments. I don't think adding a step in the process can make it easier in this situation. But like I said, if Hi-Lo is easier for you then that is only a good thing for you. I wish a TC system was easier than KO for me!

 

[sagefr0g]

If you actually find Hi-Lo easier than KO than that's great! But I think the large majority of learning counters will be much better suited going with KO. I'm assuming MOST people would think KO is easier. I think that a new counter should take a good look at several different counts before making the commitment to learn one.

I'm just having a hard time thinking about how Hi-Lo could be easier than KO. Hi-Lo is pretty much KO minus the true count adjustments. I don't think adding a step in the process can make it easier in this situation. But like I said, if Hi-Lo is easier for you then that is only a good thing for you. I wish a TC system was easier than KO for me!

the learning curve for for a genuine understanding of ko, red 7 and kiss is definately more difficult than that required for hi/lo ie. it is easier to understand on a fundamental level just what it is that you are doing and why. i don't mean this in a denigrating way towards ko, red 7 or kiss when i say that there are some convoluted steps that had to be taken from a balanced count such as hi/lo to create those systems. so you need to develope the skill of not only counting the running count (which requires using negative and positive numbers) but you also need to develope the skill of looking out for certain colored sevens, or two's ect and how to count them. it is that step that is for me more difficult than estimating the number of decks in the discard tray and the process of dividing to get your tc. then additionally the logic of how one bets upwards with your advantage with an unbalanced count as opposed to a balance count requires a 'style' of memory utilization that does not seem as naturaly logical to me as that one uses with hi/lo.
it really is not so difficult to put in to practice the skills of dividing that we learned in elementary school and the skill of deck estimation is not all that difficult either. i don't believe it would be hard for you to become a skilled user of a balanced count at all. thats my only my opinion though your mileage may vary.
best regards,
mr fr0g

 

[bnoc848]

KO and Red7 are virtually identical in ease of learning, in my opinion.

i thought it would be the same, but with KO you go in large double digits numbers like -28 but with red7 you would almost never see that and the red7 betting strategy is alot easier too

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Just use High-Low

My thoughts on staying away from Hi-Lo is that you need to be very good at estimating decks played,and remaining.As I'll be playing a good bit in AC,that means working with 8 decks.Unbalanced counts seem like they are more beginner friendly.

Actually, you don't have to be all that good at estimating decks. Remember that in blackjack, everything we do is an approximation. You can round decks, round indices, round bets and still have results close to computer perfect.

I also play in AC, and the most important skills you need to have there are Wonging out of bad counts and Wonging into good counts (in that order). No count or system or additional degree of accuracy will compensate for not being able to do that well, and to Wong, you need to estimate decks anyway. You will also need to be able to switch between 6D and 8D on the fly.

So being you already know how to use High-Low, I cannot think of any reason for switching from it. You seem to be very good at practicing; just buy a bunch of used decks from a casino and practice deck estimation. You only need to be able to estimate to the nearest deck, if that.

 

[ScottH]

i thought it would be the same, but with KO you go in large double digits numbers like -28 but with red7 you would almost never see that and the red7 betting strategy is alot easier too

You can customize your KO count so that you don't have to use negative numbers. If you really want to make a good decision on what system to use just buy KO Blackjack and read about them both. I assume you already have Blackbelt for Red 7...

 

[ScottH]

You only need to be able to estimate to the nearest deck, if that.

That's not what I have heard.

4-8 decks remain: estimate to nearest full deck
1.5-3.5 decks remain: estimate to nearest half deck
.25-1.25 decks remain: estimate to nearest quarter deck

 

[ScottH]

so you need to develope the skill of not only counting the running count (which requires using negative and positive numbers) but you also need to develope the skill of looking out for certain colored sevens, or two's ect and how to count them.

In a balanced count you STILL have to keep a running count (which requirs using negative and positive numbers).

With KO you dont need to worry about the color of the cards. The KO tags are VERY similar to Hi-Lo. The only difference is that the 7 is counted as +1 in KO.

The only difference in KO is that the 7 is +1 instead of 0. In both KO and Hi-Lo you have to keep a running count, but in KO you dont have to do any math with that number. Also, in KO you dont have to estimate decks remaining. Although those 2 things may not be too hard, it is more difficult to do it than not to do it. Also, most of the indices are at the same number in KO, so it's no problem to memorize the "I-18".

Im definitely not trying to make a case for anyone to switch from Hi-Lo, I'm simply making the facts be known for anyone else that is deciding between the two systems.

If you are deciding between Hi-Lo and KO to start out, you should first think about another thing. Do you think you will eventually upgrade your counting system? If you aren't ever planning on upgrading your system go with KO for sure. BUT, if you think you will be upgrading sometime in the future go with Hi-Lo, because then the transition to the better count will be much easier since you will already know how to make true-count conversions.