Optimal Wong-Out points for UBZ

[boneuphtoner]

Hi All,

Based on the KO book, I calculated that the authors recommend exiting the game when the TC falls to -5 TC (equivalent to a -1 TC in a balanced count) in each . According to Blackjack Attack, you GENERALLY in the real world wong-out around a TC of -2 TC in the balanced Hi-Lo. On three sims I've run, a -2 TC in a level one account is approximately equal to -3TC of level two counts. Can I extend this idea to the level 2 unbalanced count UBZ.....i.e., wong out at -7 TC (equivalent to a -3 TC in a balanced level 2 strategy). Or is my logic way off?

 

[SilentBob420BMFJ]

Hi All,

Based on the KO book, I calculated that the authors recommend exiting the game when the TC falls to -5 TC (equivalent to a -1 TC in a balanced count) in each . According to Blackjack Attack, you GENERALLY in the real world wong-out around a TC of -2 TC in the balanced Hi-Lo. On three sims I've run, a -2 TC in a level one account is approximately equal to -3TC of level two counts. Can I extend this idea to the level 2 unbalanced count UBZ.....i.e., wong out at -7 TC (equivalent to a -3 TC in a balanced level 2 strategy). Or is my logic way off?

why not wong out anytime the count is negative, or when your advantage goes below -.5%

 

[Automatic Monkey]

why not wong out anytime the count is negative, or when your advantage goes below -.5%

Because a shoe always starts out negative, and because unbalanced counts are designed to predict positive advantages but not negative ones.

This is why I got away from unbalanced counts for shoe play. You end up having to do deck estimation anyway. Might as well get your money's worth and use a balanced count.

 

[boneuphtoner]

This is why I got away from unbalanced counts for shoe play. You end up having to do deck estimation anyway. Might as well get your money's worth and use a balanced count.

Yeah, you have a good point there and I'm glad you did as I've thought about this for a long time. I've thought about that often in deciding between UBZ, ZEN, and RPC. For me, I'm leaning towards UBZ for the following reason. With an unbalanced count, you don't have to TC, but you can help your game further by doing a little true counting when the count goes negative and you have a small bet out. When the count goes really positive, at the pivot and beyond, you don't need to TC. No deck estimation/conversion is required when the count is high, you get excited, and you have a big bet out. With a balanced count, the exact opposite occurs. When the running count hovers around zero, you don't have to true count. When the count dives in a balanced count, you know it immediately and can get out of there. Negative indices? Forget it! You're outta there before it even matters. But when the running count soars, you have to TC. So, you have a big bet out there, a round is dealt to everyone, more cards are exposed, and you know you're on the border for taking insurance...and the dealer's ace is exposed. You have to recalculated the TC. More cards are dealt and you have to decide whether to double your 11 versus the dealers ace...yet another TC. Oh, and you have to do all of this while you have a big bet out and the adrenaline is flowing big time. I would wager that mistakes made here would cost you more than a wong-out TC estimate.

To me, it seems better to do an occasional TC conversion when you're contemplating jumping ship and you have a minimum bet out (where balanced counts are easier) versus facing a critical decision when you have a huge bet out (where unbalanced seems easier). I haven't heard anyone invoke this psychological aspect of choosing balanced/unbalanced strategies, but right now, this is what has me leaning towards UBZ.

Automonk, you seem quite a bit more experienced than I....what do you think of this logic?

 

[Mimosine]

QUOTE:

When the count goes really positive, at the pivot and beyond, you don't need to TC. No deck estimation/conversion is required when the count is high.



NOT TRUE! As the RC veers off course from the pivot point (which in UBZ is 0, which equals TC +2) the advantage is no longer accurately predicted by RC alone. If the count is +4 in UBZ should you have a max bet out? what if there is 1/2 deck to go? What about if the count rises to -2 from -24 in the first deck. what should you do now? how much should you bet?

you can play UBZ exactly as written, you're right you don't NEED to do deck estimation, but if you ever decide to fine tune the system for Wong out, Wong in, or Kelly betting at High + counts, then you will need to at least be aware of how RC and TC are correlated as they deviate from the pivot point of RC = 0.

An RC of +4 with 4 decks to go, isn't the same as an RC of +4 with 2 decks to go. In one scenario I would be betting the farm, in the other I would be betting 3-4X min bet.

 

[nightspirit]

Mimosine, could you eventually post the wonging and -out points for UBZ 6D in the OS thread? I simmed the 2d scenario you suggested and will post the results tomorrow.

And another question arises, could someone please give some recommandations about how much (and which) index numbers should be used for SD? There should be some more than just the Ill.18, or?
Also which rules and penetration for SD are the most common in the US? Need it for the index generation.

 

[boneuphtoner]

So, what do you guys think of my idea about wong-out points for UBZ? If -2 TC is ideal (in the real world) for level 1 balanced and -3 TC is ideal for level 2 balanced, can I assume that a -7TC would be best for UBZ?

Mimosine, I understand pivot in KO, and from what I've read the pivot in UBZ is similar to Red 7, where its at about a +2 TC. I, like you, also standardize my pivot at 0. My CVCX sims show that you reach a max bet, on average, at a RC of +4 with UBZ and 6D. I might be able to see your point about not raising the bet as much as you get deeper and deeper in the shoe, but how likely is it that you'll be down to a half deck in a six decker? Do you really think I'm hurting my game by max betting at RC +4 whether there are 2 or 4 decks remaining? Please clarify.

 

[avs21]

And another question arises, could someone please give some recommandations about how much (and which) index numbers should be used for SD? There should be some more than just the Ill.18, or?
Also which rules and penetration for SD are the most common in the US? Need it for the index generation.

Depends on where in the US you plan on playing. Northern Nevada has H17 Double 10,11 only and H17. I would say 60% is the norm for SD pen in Northern Nevada.

Tunica, Mississippi you have H17, but with 50% pen or worse. Vicksburg is 50% pen with S17 double on 10,11 only,

There are some other SD games in other states, but the majority the SD games are in Northern Nevada.

I used to use a lot more indexes, but now I narrowed it down to about 50. I decided to learn a lot because I play primarily SD and DD games. If you are not going to be playing a lot of SD games Ill 18 should be fine.

 

[nightspirit]

Thank you, avs21!