Zen Count Vs. Hi-Opt II (No Ace Side-Count)

[Southpaw]

When doing these sims why take away the entire point of using Hi Opt II? It's for one or two deck games and really needs the ASC.

Let's run sims with Zen taking away it's strong point, let's sim both using no spread whatsoever. We can make sims show whatever results we want with our bias.

DeathClutch:

This sim was not run out of my own inspiration; rather, I ran the sims on behalf of zengrifter. He told me what rules and what spreads to implement. He wanted me to test whether or not the HO2 (with no ASC) can beat the Zen Count under "certain conditions." Apparently, HO2 cannot beat Zen under these "certain conditions." This was to test a hole in his Zen-praising rhetoric. The hole was that HO2 (w/ no ASC) could beat Zen under "certain conditions."

And there is absolutely NO point in running sims to compare the two when flat betting. HO2 (no ASC) would obviously win this because it's PE is higher. However, what kind of win rate does one expect to have in today's blackjack conditions when they are flat betting? My guess is that your EV would be negative, unless you were implementing non-CC strategies.

And I'll put this out there again as I did during my initial post in this thread:

HO2 (with an ASC) has outperformed any other system that I have bothered running sims with. It certainly is NOT my intention to say the system is weak. This was ONLY a TEST to see how the system did without its ASC. A test requested that I perform by zengrifter.

 

[Southpaw]

extra effort? you play 4-5 hours on your kitchen table everyday, and doing an ASC is extra effort? keeping a SC and adding 10 SCORE points minimum is well worth the effort. HO2 shines for SD and DD, and you said it yourself, zen is a great COMPROMISE, if you really don't want to do ASC, but it will never replace it. also, I'm gonna be pretty busy for the next couple of days. Do you mind setting up my sim of HO2 with a -1 Ace tag from your kitchen table for me?

Jack_Black: I'm really not interested in responding to the first part of your post. I tried to express in my post that that was a personal opinion of mine (rather than something that I was claiming as a define truth) and that the extra advantage is not worth it to ME, when weighed against the added difficulty. Yes, Zen IS a COMPROMISED system, but to me it gives me all the power I want at a rather low difficulty of use. It was never my intention to discuss HO2 with an ASC in this thread ...

But as for the sim, I'd be happy to run it for you if you specify some parameters. Moreover, I find it unclear as to what you mean by adding a -1 tag to the ace. If you did this then the count would be unbalanced. I have no experience with unbalanced counts, other than I've noticed that they tend to be weak. However, to balance it you could switch the 6 tag to +2 (from +1), but then you'd be left with the Zen Count. Or do you mean switch the Ace's side count tag to -1? Doing so would result in a decline in performance, as the ace SHOULD be considered -2 (for betting purposes) in level 2 systems. As I previously mentioned, this is one of Zen's compromises.

 

[zengrifter]

extra effort? you play 4-5 hours on your kitchen table everyday, and doing an ASC is extra effort? keeping a SC and adding 10 SCORE points minimum is well worth the effort.

I'm not going to repeat ad nauseaum why most HO2 and other sidecount players are deluded.
Enjoy working harder for the same net gain. zg

 

[Jack_Black]

I'm not going to repeat ad nauseaum why most HO2 and other sidecount players are deluded.
Enjoy working harder for the same net gain. zg

how does 10 SCORE points=same net gain?

 

[Jack_Black]

Jack_Black: I'm really not interested in responding to the first part of your post. I tried to express in my post that that was a personal opinion of mine (rather than something that I was claiming as a define truth) and that the extra advantage is not worth it to ME, when weighed against the added difficulty. Yes, Zen IS a COMPROMISED system, but to me it gives me all the power I want a rather low difficulty of use. It was never my intention to discuss HO2 with an ASC in this thread ...

But as for the sim, I'd be happy to run it for you if you specify some parameters. Moreover, I find it unclear as to what you mean by adding a -1 tag to the ace. If you did this then the count would be unbalanced. I have no experience with unbalanced counts, other than I've noticed that they tend to be weak. However, to balance it you could switch the 6 tag to +2 (from +1), but then you'd be left with the Zen Count. Or do you mean switch the Ace's side count tag to -1? Doing so would result in a decline in performance, as the ace SHOULD be considered -2 in level 2 systems. As I previously mentioned, this is one of Zen's compromises.

why not, you basically switched everything from the zen to ho2 system, so why not see how it would be the other way around. IOW, go ahead and give 6 a +2 tag.

 

[Southpaw]

why not, you basically switched everything from the zen to ho2 system, so why not see how it would be the other way around. IOW, go ahead and give 6 a +2 tag.

I haven't the slightest clue what you were trying to say in your first sentence.

And it sounds like you want run sims counts using the following tags:

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

(This is EXACTLY the same as the Zen Count, so I don't really know how much good it would be to run the sim again unless you gave me different parameters.)

And then it seemed like you wanted a sim using these tags before you edited your post:

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

(Out of pure intuition, I'd guess that these tags would make for an atrocious unbalanced count).

However, if you want me to run the sims for either of these, I will.

 

[Jack_Black]

ahhhh, I know nothing of zen count tag values. what I was trying to say was since you were using ho2 indices for zen, why not switch and use some of the zen tags for HO2, but it is rather pointless now that I see the zen tags.

So I see now that HO2 tag values were designed specifically to have an ASC as well as other SCs. or to choose zen designed specifically to get rid of SCs with a little cost. nevertheless, it is important to use HO2 with SC for hand held games, because that is what it was made for. Shoe games can be up for debate, or just simply up to the user.

 

[Southpaw]

nevertheless, it is important to use HO2 with SC for hand held games, because that is what it was made for.

I am going to just agree to disagree with you on how important it really is. Perhaps sometime over the holiday, I will perform an extensive study comparing Hi-Opt II (w/ an ASC) to the Zen Count under numerous playing conditions and using a wide array of playing and betting strategies. But then again, if I did this, I would not really be adding anything new to the AP conversation, as Snyder has covered this before.

 

[iCountNTrack]

Reading the same thread over and over again gives me a headache, what also gives me a headache is when i hear the same statements that are not substantiated with any simulations or calculations.

Statements like "Hi-Opt 2 is obsolete", or "the 1/4 density Ace side count doesn't work" are simply erroneous because that is what good simulations show.

In any case you can never make hasty generalizations when comparing counting systems because there are many factors (house rules, number of decks, penetration, betting strategy, playing strategy).

I do agree that Zen will beat Hi-Opt II without an ace side count in many cases but there are cases where it wouldn't, for instance if Late surrender is included or if we only use the Illustrious 18 Hi-Opt II will triumph (it is well known that Zen derives it max power when all indices are included). Zen with I18 will barely beat hi-lo.

So to sum up this futile discussion,

Zen is one of the best overall counts, however if you mostly play pitch games and willing to make a little more effort and side count aces (the 1/4D density DOES WORK!) then Hi-Opt II will be the best of all, even in the event you had to play a shoe game and decided to drop the ace side count, Hi-Opt 2 will still work and would beat a fine level 1 count like Hi-Lo

 

[zengrifter]

how does 10 SCORE points=same net gain?

I said I wouldn't. Suffice to say you missed the several times I posted on this issue over the years. Simply stated, if you are like most side-count players you are not receiving the full advantage of side-counting because you are not using a secondary count overlay and you are simply following the sub-optimal 1/4D estimated Ace density approach as advocated by Humble and others. So you actually get a fraction of the extra gain, and you win regardless, and you proclaim "side-counting is easy," and you look at sims and your underlying delusion becomes self-reinforcing. zg

 

[zengrifter]

Reading the same thread over and over again gives me a headache, what also gives me a headache is when i hear the same statements that are not substantiated with any simulations or calculations.

Statements like "Hi-Opt 2 is obsolete", or "the 1/4 density Ace side count doesn't work" are simply erroneous because that is what good simulations show.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you were one of a few commenters who previously debunked my argument against HO2 by suggesting that HO2 without Ace sidecounting would trump ZEN, yes?

Again, "obsolete" doesn't equate to "doesn't work" - I use 'obsolete' in the same manner as Uston and Snyder (see Uston on BJ 1986; see also Snyder Super Counter Side Count 1984)

And I have never said "1/4D density method doesn't work" - as anyone who has repeatedly read my argument would surely know.

The problem with sim results and the simplistic 1/4D Ace-density approach advocated by Humble, Carlson, AND Revere (in his RAPM) is that the sim can do it flawlessly and the usual practitioner only obtains results that I estimate leaves a net zero gain over a comparable Ace reckoned count (eg, AO2 vs ZEN; HO1 vs HiLo, etc.)

And so then the majority of 1/4D Ace density practitioners who win then say "Its easy and works great" while in reality they are working harder for the same net result, all the while so proud (read deluded) in their accomplishment.

So whereas Uston choose to call HO2 and the ilk 'obsolete' I will henceforth say 'antiquated'.

And again, I used HO2 with side-count(s) for several years, as did Uston before he also switched. zg

 

[Southpaw]

I do agree that Zen will beat Hi-Opt II without an ace side count in many cases but there are cases where it wouldn't, for instance if Late surrender is included or if we only use the Illustrious 18 Hi-Opt II will triumph (it is well known that Zen derives it max power when all indices are included). Zen with I18 will barely beat hi-lo.

I think iCountNTrack brings up a good point here with regards to LS and restricted indexes. I will rerun the 3 simulations, but this time checking how LS and restricted indexes affect the outcome. I will then revise my first post including the new sims (and likely my conclusions as well).

 

[Automatic Monkey]

I said I wouldn't. Suffice to say you missed the several times I posted on this issue over the years. Simply stated, if you are like most side-count players you are not receiving the full advantage of side-counting because you are not using a secondary count overlay and you are simply following the sub-optimal 1/4D estimated Ace density approach as advocated by Humble and others. So you actually get a fraction of the extra gain, and you win regardless, and you proclaim "side-counting is easy," and you look at sims and your underlying delusion becomes self-reinforcing. zg

One nice thing about using a secondary balanced ace count is that it's easy to use the combined count for certain index plays, the big one being splitting 10's. But on the other hand, using the ace-density method makes it easier to treat the aces as low cards for your insurance bets.

Overall, HO2 without a sidecount does not equal the performance of High-Low in a shoe game if you are using a spread and a Wongout appropriate to a shoe game.

 

[zengrifter]

if we only use the Illustrious 18 Hi-Opt II will triumph (it is well known that Zen derives it max power when all indices are included). Zen with I18 will barely beat hi-lo.

Okay, maybe that is my confusion -

"HO2 I18 w/o sidecount will beat ZEN I18?"
"HO2 I18 w/o sidecount will beat HiLo I18 in shoes?" ​

 

[zengrifter]

Overall, HO2 without a sidecount does not equal the performance of High-Low in a shoe game if you are using a spread and a Wongout appropriate to a shoe game.

Glad to hear it. The good Dr. iCountNStork had us going there! z:eyepatch:g

 

[Southpaw]

Overall, HO2 without a sidecount does not equal the performance of High-Low in a shoe game if you are using a spread and a Wongout appropriate to a shoe game.

I would agree with this, for if my memory serves me right(correct me if I'm wrong), the BC of HO2 (no ASC) is only .91, whereas the BC of Hi-Lo is .95.

 

[iCountNTrack]

Overall, HO2 without a sidecount does not equal the performance of High-Low in a shoe game if you are using a spread and a Wongout appropriate to a shoe game.

Glad to hear it. The good Dr. iCountNStork had us going there! z:eyepatch:g

Interesting, but i beg to differ, again simulations speak louder than words

 

[zengrifter]

Hmmm... what is missing from the above sim, class? zg

 

[iCountNTrack]

Hmmm... what is missing from the above sim, class? zg

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Interesting, but i beg to differ, again simulations speak louder than words

Try it with a 1:20 spread and a Wongout at -1 or -2.