Questions KISSIII

#1
I just finished reading BBII and am converting from Red7. Would using the R7 count with the KIII indices work? It would just be 1 less thing to change.
 

prankster

Well-Known Member
#2
hi-
I don't know the answer to your question but Fred Renzey is a member of this websit. You might send him a PM. BTW I've used KISS III for years and it gets the $$$. :joker:
 

Renzey

Well-Known Member
#3
V Lazlo said:
I just finished reading BBII and am converting from Red7. Would using the R7 count with the KIII indices work? It would just be 1 less thing to change.
Just go right ahead and use the 22 KISS indices from pg. 155 of Bluebook II. They will work just fine with Red 7. Be sure to change your IRC though. If you don't, then lower all the indices by 21 points each for the six deck game.
 
#4
Renzey said:
Just go right ahead and use the 22 KISS indices from pg. 155 of Bluebook II. They will work just fine with Red 7. Be sure to change your IRC though. If you don't, then lower all the indices by 21 points each for the six deck game.
Thanks, enjoyed the book very much.
 
#5
prankster said:
hi-
I don't know the answer to your question but Fred Renzey is a member of this websit. You might send him a PM. BTW I've used KISS III for years and it gets the $$$. :joker:
Do you use KIII right out of the box or did you do any modifications?
 

Renzey

Well-Known Member
#9
beyondbj said:
really , but my old book seems not include this

is there any update in new version?
The 2009 printing of Bluebook II has that play in the charts on page 155. The index number for six decks is "30". That number is semi-risk averse.
 
Last edited:

beyondbj

Well-Known Member
#10
Renzey said:
The 2009 printing of Bluebook II has that play in the charts on page 155. The index number for six decks is "30". That number is semi-risk averse.

is that the only updated ? my version is 2004

and how about for one or two decks?

pls email me the updated pages if possible
 

Renzey

Well-Known Member
#11
beyondbj said:
is that the only updated ? my version is 2004

and how about for one or two decks?
pls email me the updated pages if possible
Since 2004, there has been extra information crammed onto about 20 scattered pages. The extra info deals mostly with H17 indices, player's EV with the KISS indices at neutral and "29" RC, player's overall EV at various RC's from "14" to "32", some dollar-per-hour improved yields from adding late surrender, a chart showing the TC vs. RC at various shoe depths, a simplified way to play the five -1 TC hand deviations, and some ROR charts for 4 hours, 25 hours and 300 hours of play using BJRM2002,

The published index number for doubling 10 vs. 10 in the single and double deck chart is "25". It was printed as a safe "composite" number for pitch games, but in reality, you can use "23" for single deck.
 

prankster

Well-Known Member
#12
V Lazlo said:
Do you use KIII right out of the box or did you do any modifications?
I don't go too crazy with indices. I use the indice that tells me when to take insurance,15 or 16 vs dealers 10, 12vs 2 or 3, and of course if LS is offered I use it accordingly. In short-KISS III has been good to me. The best thing, by far that I ever did for my game was to buy and read Blackjack Bluebook II.
 
#13
Kiss III Low Count Index Plays

In BBII p176 Fred says that hands with low counts need to be true counted.
Where is the complete chart of low counted hands?
Is this really that important to Kiss III BJ?
 
Last edited:

Renzey

Well-Known Member
#14
How low do you want to go?

HeadsUp said:
In BBII p176 Fred say that hands with low counts need to be true counted.
Where is the complete chart of low counted hands?
Is this really that important to Kiss III BJ?
Playing your negative index plays is not all that important since you'll have only 1 unit riding on them. Still, even in the shoe game, you'll still probably be around for the -1 TC deviations.

There are five main ones, and they're listed on page 176. They are 12 vs 6,,, 13 vs 2,,, 9 vs 3,,, A/2 vs 5 and A/4 vs 4. Recognizing when to simply hit all five of these hands is not hard to do -- once you become familiar with what the RC should normally be at the various shoe depths.

Remember, the KISS RC normally rises by 2 points for every deck that get dealt out. So, starting at "9", when you're 1 deck into it, a neutral RC would be "11". Two decks in it would be "13", Three in should be "15" and four in should be "17". Now, if you're say, 1 deck in and your RC is only "5", you should indeed just hit all five of these hands. Why? Because you're 6 points low with 5 decks left. If you were 4 decks in and the count was "14", you should again hit all 5 of these hands because you're 3 points low with 2 decks left. In fact;

ANYTIME THE RUNNING COUNT IS LOW BY MORE THAN THE
REMAINING DECKS, YOU SHOULD JUST HIT THESE HANDS!


No division or converting is needed. What is needed is to be familiar with what your running count should "normally" be at any particular point.

If you want to go further and play the -2 TC hands in that same "true count mode", then just hit 9 vs 4,,, 10 vs 9,,, 12 vs 5 and 13 vs 3 anytime your RC is lower than normal by more than 2x the number of remaining decks. This is basically spelled out on pages 175 and 176 along with the ever-nagging 16 vs 10 criterion..
 
Last edited:
#15
True Fudging with DD Index Numbers Kiss III

Fred,

With respect to p174 in BBII true fudging also applies to DDBJ but only regarding high index numbers right? Would you ever use the true fudging principle for insurance decisions as well in DDBJ?
 

Renzey

Well-Known Member
#16
HeadsUp said:
Fred,

True fudging also applies to DDBJ but only regarding high index numbers right? Would you ever use the true fudging principle for insurance decisions as well in DDBJ?
Yes, you would! The Insurance decision does come at a pretty high index number (+3 TC).
Now, starting off your double deck at "17" RC, if you were very early in the double deck, you should use the stated number of "23" for taking Insurance. That should make sense since nearly 2 decks are left and your RC has quickly risen by 6 points.
That index number of "23" will hold true until you get a full deck in the discard trey. By then, you should use "22" as your Insurance strike number. That's because a neutral RC at that point would be "19", and you'd be 3 points over that with one deck left (+3 TC). That'll take you all the way to the shuffle almost no matter how good the pen might be.

Notice that you should do the same thing with any other index play that carries a number higher than "23". That is, once you're a deck into the trey, lower your strike number by a point for plays like 15 vs. 10 or for 10 vs 10, etc.. The same is also true for ramping up your bets. But don't mess with any index numbers of "22" or lower. They're too close to the pivot of that unwavering +2 TC ("21" RC).

All readers remember -- this post is concerning DOUBLE DECK games!
 
Last edited:
#17
Kiss II vs III PE vs BC

Fred,

Have you ever run a comparison of Kiss II vs III for DD and 4-6D outcomes?
With a higher PE, wouldn't it be better to play DD with Kiss II AND with a higher BC, wouldn't it be better to play 4-6D with Kiss III?
 

Renzey

Well-Known Member
#19
HeadsUp said:
Fred,

Have you ever run a comparison of Kiss II vs III for DD and 4-6D outcomes?
With a higher PE, wouldn't it be better to play DD with Kiss II AND with a higher BC, wouldn't it be better to play 4-6D with Kiss III?
Page 194 of BJBBII has a chart giving the results of KISS II and KISS III for both DD and 6D runs. Those results are shown in straight EV rather than in SCORE, with betting ramps that yield the same hourly standard deviations for both. They are:

system.........DD............6D
KISS II.......+.63%.......+.64%
KISS III......+.69%.......+.70%

Spreads were 1-to-6 for DD and 1-to-10 for the shoe. Pen was 60% for DD and 71% for the shoe. The DD run was in "play all" mode and the shoe was wonged out of at an average RC of "7" (lower early on and higher later on).
 
Last edited:
Top