Risk Averse Catch 20 Indices for KO

I varied it from 67% and 80%. I also varied the spread from 1-8 to 1-10. These numbers were the average across all those combinations of variables.
 
This chart says to take insurance for 6D at RC +2. I don't understand: the insurance index for 6D KO is RC +3.

Please explain.

Best regards,

FD
 
I was confused as well, but for every single simulation I ran with KO (and I have run lots of them...), the results from CVData said to take insurance at +2. If anybody can find a set of rules in which insurance should be taken at +3 according to CVData that I could reproduce please let me know.:confused:

Edit:
Results from CVIndex:
RC = +1, Insurance = -0.007495
RC = +2, Insurance = +0.001866
RC = +3, Insurance = +0.011845

So it looks like it's about even at RC+2, which is perhaps why the RA indices generated say insure at +2.
 
Last edited:
Assume_R:

1. I searched for the answer as to how where/how this table came about on other threads but couldn't find an answer--so could you shed some light please on this table and your take on the data?

2. I'm also puzzled by the table's instructions to go to max bets on a 6D game at a RC of 0 (vs. the KO authors' recommendation of max bets at the Pivot Point of RC +4)?

Thank you,

FD
 
Last edited:
Finn Dog said:
Assume_R:

1. I searched for the answer as to how where/how this table came about on other threads but couldn't find an answer--so could you shed some light please on this table and your take on the data?

2. I'm also puzzled by the table's instructions to go to max bets on a 6D game at a RC of 0 (vs. the KO authors' recommendation of max bets at the Pivot Point of RC +4)?

Thank you,

FD
Click to expand...

Sure, FD, I'd be happy to. And by the way if you see any errors don't hesitate to point them out and let me know. Constructive criticism and peer review is crucial to developing good systems.

I will first link you to the data results from all the simulations. It can be found here:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AjC3jW5bF0yNdGZVZXA0cmZzT0UySWhtSi1fZlpvQnc&hl=en

Now I will explain exactly how I calculated the data.

  1. For each row (i.e. for each set of conditions), I inputed the data from the "Input" columns (columns A - E) into CVCX.
  2. I then used CVCX with the KO Full system and a min bet of $10 to calculate the optimal betting spreads, with the results shown in columns F - I.
  3. I then input all the data from columns A - G into the CVData program using the CVIndex simulator with "Risk Averse" indices selected, and the "Catch 20" indices selected.
  4. The results from CVIndex using the data from columns A - I are shown in columns J - AD.
  5. I then repeated this for multiple conditions, and the results are what I came up with for KOAR.
  6. The min and max bet are taken from the optimal full Kelly betting, and are averaged over the min and max bets taken from CVCX over all the different conditions.

I personally was surprised that CVCX said to bet so large so early, but can't find a valid reason to dispute the optimal betting it outputs. Perhaps if 0.7Kelly was used, the betting criteria would be different.

Again, your critiques and comments are most welcome.
 
Finn Dog said:
I'm also puzzled by the table's instructions to go to max bets on a 6D game at a RC of 0 (vs. the KO authors' recommendation of max bets at the Pivot Point of RC +4)?
Click to expand...

I have included the CVCX output for KOAR optimal betting spreads (for DAS) in the spreadsheet on my previous post (it's on a different sheet called "KOAR Betting" if you aren't familiar with google docs).

If you want me to rerun with any combination of rules let me know the exact criteria, or even your exact proposed betting spread (min bet ends @ -5, max bet starts at +3 perhaps?) and I will add it to that spreadsheet and give you the output.
 
Assume_R:

Very interesting.

I guess the only remaining $64,000 question is how KOAR would fair against the most advanced KO version, KO Full, (with its full set of indexes similar to the Illustrious 18) combined with the traditional KO bet spread that starts at the Key Count and maxes out at the Pivot Point?

Best regards,

FD
 
Last edited:
Finn Dog said:
Assume_R:

Very interesting.

I guess the only remaining $64,000 question is how KOAR would fair against the most advanced KO version, KO Full, (with its full set of indexes similar to the Illustrious 18) combined with the traditional KO bet spread that starts at the Key Count and maxes out at the Pivot Point?

Best regards,

FD
Click to expand...

The $64,000 answer has been posted on the spreadsheet under the "KOAR Betting" page.

What it comes down to is using KOAR indices vs. KO Full indices yields marginal improvements in score, Win/Hr and RoR.

However, using the KO Full betting scheme (as published in the KO book) will yield a lower RoR but also a lower win rate, and thus a lower score than KOAR.

The data is all there in the spreadsheet, so make of it what you will, and don't hesitate to ask any other questions, FD!
 
Last edited:
superyoungg said:
Sorry for reviving an old thread, but I'd also like to know what the LS index plays for KOAR are - if anyone has them, that is. Thanks.
Click to expand...

A quick cvindex generation w/ 6 decks gives me:

RsFxm.png


ZG: 6 deck and 8 deck both gave me +2 from cvindex, but that might or not be a coincidence. In pitch games, it might be different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top