q,estions regarding unbalanced card counting system

E

elias001

Member
#1
#1
Hello

I am new to learning about card counting. I am interested in learning an unbalanced counting system. I am not good at fast mental division. Okay, i study pure math in school, but that does not directly translate to doing mental arithmetic on the fly. I also have a depth perception problem hence, i am not confident i can gauge the discard card tray very well in terms of number of decks that have been used for calculating the true count.

I read that I have the option of KO (rookie, preferred, full), UBZ2, Kiss count system, Uston SS.

Also, besides the true counting KO, can you true count these other system the same way you true count KO. Which one of these systems can i use other side counts with it, and also which one has the most required extra indices to give one better estimated deck composition info for more informed betting purposes.

What are the differences between these systems. I know there are statistical measurements that displays different rankings and rating such as BE, PE, IC, etc. but for any of you who have used them, which one do you guys feel that it gives better and accurate results in terms of betting and actual return on investment.

thanks in advance.
 
A

ace157

Well-Known Member
#3
#3
you can TC any system, either UB or balanced. however, IMO if you're going to bother TCing in the first place, just learn a balanced system. also, if you're going to bother with MULTIPLE side counts, just put in some effort and work on your deck estimation, it will be much better than the complicaitons of a side count, let alone several.

KO will be the easiest to learn, UBZII will do good for handheld and shoe games, and SS will be the best (of those listed) for shoe games. As for Indexes, you can add as many or few as you want. The "open source UBZII" formulated on this site has wat are called composite, or rounded indexes that you use the same indexes no matter how many decks are in the game.
 
C

Canceler

Well-Known Member
#4
#4
ace157 said:
IMO if you're going to bother TCing in the first place, just learn a balanced system.
Click to expand...
Yes. First he gives us all the reasons he can't perform a true count calculation. Then he wants to know about true counting unbalanced systems. This does not compute.
 
Deathclutch

Deathclutch

Well-Known Member
#5
#5
Here's a couple things off the top of my head. If you want a strong unbalanced system you could always purchase the color of blackjack. It gives you the power of TKO minus having to ever TC.

If you're not intimidated by SC's there are other routes you can take, just look at the systems. Find what makes a count strong for PE and IC and what makes it strong for BC. There are ways to get both worlds. For this route I recommend KISS.
 
E

elias001

Member
#6
#6
"Yes. First he gives us all the reasons he can't perform a true count calculation. Then he wants to know about true counting unbalanced systems. This does not compute."

OKay, maybe i should further clarify, i have a depth perception problem due to medical conditions of my eyesight. So i am not certain how accurate i can judge the height of a card pile to infer how many decks there are from the pile.

From my understanding, there are formulas where i can convert the running count of an unbalanced system into the equivalent true count of a balanced system, a la Brent Harris's post. Using such formula, it does not require me to do any deck estimation.

In any case, the Uston SS system vs UBZ2, are they both comparable in terms of both pitch games vs shoe games?

One other thing, anyone knows where i can find the Uston SS system?? I tried to google the Synder's Blackjack Forum 12/86 article, but can't find anything.

Again thank you in advance.
 
Last edited:
R

Renzey

Well-Known Member
#7
#7
elias001 said:
Anyone know where i can find the Uston SS system?? I tried to google the Synder's Blackjack Forum 12/86 article, but can't find anything.
Click to expand...
The Uston SS Count goes like this:

....2.....3.....4.....5.....6.....7.....8.....9....10....A
..+2...+2....+2...+3...+2...+1.....0....-1....-2....-2

I'm not aware of anyplace its parameters are structured. But probably the most streamlined way to implement it (for 6 decks) is to begin off the top with an RC of "18", and use "40" as your key count strike point for raising your bets (roughly +1.5 TC).

Insurance gets taken at "50", as well as doubling 8 vs. 5, doubling 9 vs. 7, standing 12 vs. 2, and doubling A/8 vs. 4.

Stand 16 vs. 10 @ "29", stand 15 vs. 10 @ "54".

Double 8 vs. 6 @ "42" as well as stand 12 vs. 3

Double 9 vs. 2 @ "39" as well as double 11 vs. A and A/8 vs. 5 and 6.

Stand 16 vs. 9 @ "60" as well as double 10 vs. 10.

These are all direct "double-ups" of the level one KISS III system.
 
E

elias001

Member
#8
#8
@Renzey,

thanks for the info.

Just some more quick questions, the Uston SS system do not have its own ill 18 indices or a separate full set of indicies, also are there special indicies for surrendering and insurance taking.

Where can i find old copies of old issues of Snyder's Blackjack forum mag articles.

Do i apply Brent Harris true count conversion formula to other unbalanced system the way i do for the KO system.

Thanks again
 
Deathclutch

Deathclutch

Well-Known Member
#9
#9
elias001 said:
@Renzey,

thanks for the info.

Just some more quick questions, the Uston SS system do not have its own ill 18 indices or a separate full set of indicies, also are there special indicies for surrendering and insurance taking.

Where can i find old copies of old issues of Snyder's Blackjack forum mag articles.

Do i apply Brent Harris true count conversion formula to other unbalanced system the way i do for the KO system.

Thanks again
Click to expand...
The best way I would recommend doing it if you plan on using this count is to find the TC formula for it (I don't know what it is) and then use the TKO color method from the book I mentioned above. Basically your "warm" PP changed with the number of decks giving you the power of the TC while not having to perform any conversion at the table. It may sound sketchy at first but once you see how it is presented you'll be amazed at how simple it is. I wouldn't be surprised if all unbalanced counts began using a method like it.
 
E

elias001

Member
#10
#10
i try to find info from the CV blackjack playing strategy database, but i can't find anything on it, it listed all the other uston count system, but just not that particular one.
 
D

duanedibley

Well-Known Member
#11
#11
If you are just starting and want an easy unbalanced count then reKO is a great one to start with. It is as easy as they come and everything you need to learn it is published online: See here. If you want to add the full indices later you can get them in Modern Blackjack.

If you are playing shoe games primarily (ie 6 decks, not 1 or 2 deck games) then reKO will perform just as well as Hi-Lo. But if you want an unbalanced count that can handle single and double deck games as well then UBZ2 is a better choice.

I would strongly recommend not learning a level-3 count like Uston SS. This is a terrible count to start with, and by the time you learn enough about counting and get enough practice to warrant upgrading to a more powerful system, you will most likely have realized by then that level 3 counts are not worth your time.
 
E

elias001

Member
#12
#12
what does playing efficiency mean in practice?? I know the math, but as far as relating to actual playing in terms of what it information it reflects, that is a different story. Also, what is more important for shoe games, BC or PE??
 
A

assume_R

Well-Known Member
#13
#13
elias001 said:
what does playing efficiency mean in practice?? I know the math, but as far as relating to actual playing in terms of what it information it reflects, that is a different story. Also, what is more important for shoe games, BC or PE??
Click to expand...
Firstly, both are important. Some would say PE is more important in Handheld games (1 or 2 decks) but that does not mean it isn't important in shoe games.

PE is regarding indices, and how accurate the deviations from basic strategy are. The Illustrious 18 are usually considered to have the most important deviations from basic strategy. Without side counts the maximum PE you can get is around 0.70, and with 11 separate side counts you could theoretically get to a PE of 1.00. Ace side counts (and perhaps 7's) are usually the only ones people use, if any.

BC is betting correlation and lets you know how accurate your estimated advantage is. This is important in knowing exactly how much to bet over the minimum, and when to bet your max.

Both PE and BC will change your win rate per hour and your risk of ruin.
 
D

duanedibley

Well-Known Member
#14
#14
"Playing efficiency" describes how accurately your counting system tells you when and how to deviate from basic strategy. Playing efficiency is relatively unimportant in 6d+ games. That is why you see counting systems with rounded indices that do 99.9% as well as their full versions under normal playing conditions. See Hi-Lo Lite for example. Most of your gain will come from betting correctly with the count in these games, and how effectively you can do this corresponds to the betting correlation of your system.

In single and double deck games this trend reverses, and counts with higher playing efficiency become more desirable.
 
E

elias001

Member
#15
#15
well on trying out CV Blackjack 5.0 with the KO full, i don't feel like my bankroll of 1000 increases much at all using a 1-5 spread with 5 dollars being the min bet. I keep increasing from 1 to 5 long before the count gets anywhere near the pivot point.

The sim session i was having is a 6d shoe game.

I want to try out the various unbalanced system on CV and see which one i like best before i settling on using a unbalanced count for long term playing purposes.

In the end, i tried making myself to have a 25 dollars min bet, then there was some marked imporvements, but not much else.
 
A

assume_R

Well-Known Member
#16
#16
elias001 said:
well on trying out CV Blackjack 5.0 with the KO full, i don't feel like my bankroll of 1000 increases much at all using a 1-5 spread with 5 dollars being the min bet. I keep increasing from 1 to 5 long before the count gets anywhere near the pivot point.

The sim session i was having is a 6d shoe game.

I want to try out the various unbalanced system on CV and see which one i like best before i settling on using a unbalanced count for long term playing purposes.

In the end, i tried making myself to have a 25 dollars min bet, then there was some marked imporvements, but not much else.
Click to expand...
Just for semantics purposes, CVBlackjack is the practice program, and CVCX or CVData are the sim programs. Anyway, unless you play a lot on CVBlackjack, don't take your results too seriously, because of your small sample size (i.e. not playing thousands of hands). If you want to know what to expect in the long run, this is using 2billion simulated hands using CVCX with your stated rules:

6D, 75%, S17DAS, $5-$25, $1k bankroll, "KO Full 6" (IRC = -20)
Optimal Kelly betting ramp:
@RC -5, $5
@RC -4, $10
@RC -3, $15
@RC -2, $20
@RC -1, $25
Average Win rate = $3.34 / hr
90% of the time after you play 1 hour you will be between $788 and +$1218
RoR (chance of losing all $1,000) = 67.5%


Nothing like good hard numbers to back up your systems :)

If you want me to rerun the sims with different numbers, let me know and I'd be happy to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top