Zen Original

Solo player

Solo player

Well-Known Member
Been learing Zen original. I've got about 13 hours into it. Going from a level 1 to a level 2 seems much easier to pick up than I thought it would be. :)
 
what was your original? I'm curious if your initial was balanced and how hard the transition from a balanced to a balanced is versus a unbalanced to a balanced.
 
Solo player said:
I've used Hi-Lo. But the last couple of years I played K-O
Click to expand...

On 6D, DAS, RSA, S17, NS --- What is the increased advantage of a ZEN user versus a KO Full/TKO user. I'd like to be able to compare the two to see if the switch is truly worth it.
 
Draw backs to using K-O

After using K-O for a couple of years here is what I do not like about it.

1) After playing off and on the last few months along side Hi-Lo players. K-O does under bet early in the shoe and over bet near the end of a shoe.

2) Many more indices to learn. The starting points for 6 deck vs 2 deck are a lot different. Indices have to be memorized for each game. I feel this makes it harder to switch tables\games and make correct index plays.

I think in real casino conditions playing day in and day out juming from 6 deckers down to 2 deckers, learning a balaced count is the way to go.
If you only play one game at your local casino then K-O will work. Adding TKO is just a lot more extra work for little if any gain. Take the time to learn a balanced count.
 
Solo player said:
After using K-O for a couple of years here is what I do not like about it.

1) After playing off and on the last few months along side Hi-Lo players. K-O does under bet early in the shoe and over bet near the end of a shoe.
Click to expand...
I noticed this too. Not just with you, but with a couple of other players that I've seen using KO. A lot of people here refer to it as a powerful count, but from what I've seen it just plain under performs time after time. Good luck with your switch to Zen! Let me know how it works out.
 
Solo player said:
Been learing Zen original. I've got about 13 hours into it. Going from a level 1 to a level 2 seems much easier to pick up than I thought it would be. :)
Click to expand...
Presumably you played KO to avoid the TC adjustment.
If that is now not a problem, great!
IF TC is a problem, you'd be better served with UBZ, which performs on par with ZEN. zg
 
I thought the same, could count down a deck perfectly fine. But in a casino enviroment it was much harder than i expected with Zen.

I went from hi-lo to Zen.

you learning all indicies?

Ming
 
Solo player said:
After using K-O for a couple of years here is what I do not like about it.

1) After playing off and on the last few months along side Hi-Lo players. K-O does under bet early in the shoe and over bet near the end of a shoe.
Click to expand...

But, it is better in the sweet spot; which is why it performs so well overall.

Solo player said:
2) Many more indices to learn. The starting points for 6 deck vs 2 deck are a lot different. Indices have to be memorized for each game. I feel this makes it harder to switch tables\games and make correct index plays.

I think in real casino conditions playing day in and day out juming from 6 deckers down to 2 deckers, learning a balaced count is the way to go.
If you only play one game at your local casino then K-O will work. Adding TKO is just a lot more extra work for little if any gain. Take the time to learn a balanced count.
Click to expand...

This is exactly why I came up with REKO. Not only are the indexes the same for any number of shoes, they are the same for all indexed hands. +2 always.
 
QFIT said:
This is exactly why I came up with REKO. Not only are the indexes the same for any number of shoes, they are the same for all indexed hands. +2 always.
Click to expand...

But when you compare the indices for REKO vs REKO-f there is quite a lot of difference. Also if you want to add more indices to REKO would the additional indices also be at 2?

When these 2 counts are simmed in CVCX, REKO-f out does REKO so learning more exact indices certainly helps.

Also I have sims in CVCX that I would like to post. But I can't seem to get a screen shot from my 3 year old laptop. Is it possible that my laptop does not have the right software?
 
Solo player said:
But when you compare the indices for REKO vs REKO-f there is quite a lot of difference. Also if you want to add more indices to REKO would the additional indices also be at 2?

When these 2 counts are simmed in CVCX, REKO-f out does REKO so learning more exact indices certainly helps.

Also I have sims in CVCX that I would like to post. But I can't seem to get a screen shot from my 3 year old laptop. Is it possible that my laptop does not have the right software?
Click to expand...

REKO is as good as HiLo. REKO-F is more complex and better. You pick yoour poison.

Yes, you can add more at +2. Cacarulo did this with many indexes showing further improvement. Just not as much improvement as when using exact indexes.

Any Windows PC should allow screeshots.
 
QFIT said:
Realize that "HiLo Full Indices" has 148 indices.
Click to expand...

Yes . Thats my point. Zen does very well with the 34 indices I used vs. all the indices for Hi-LO,REKO-F,and REKO

And using Zen, one set of indices works well for 2dk. or 6dk
 
Solo player said:
After using K-O for a couple of years here is what I do not like about it.

1) After playing off and on the last few months along side Hi-Lo players. K-O does under bet early in the shoe and over bet near the end of a shoe.

2) Many more indices to learn. The starting points for 6 deck vs 2 deck are a lot different. Indices have to be memorized for each game. I feel this makes it harder to switch tables\games and make correct index plays.

I think in real casino conditions playing day in and day out juming from 6 deckers down to 2 deckers, learning a balaced count is the way to go.
If you only play one game at your local casino then K-O will work. Adding TKO is just a lot more extra work for little if any gain. Take the time to learn a balanced count.
Click to expand...

All good information to hear, but you may be mistaken about TKO. It's actually fairly simple to learn if you are already a talented KO Full user. TKO is somewhat more precise, and actually fixes the problem you have addressed with KO about underbetting at the beginning of the shoe. With a 6D shoe, we'd actually have roughly a .5% advantage at a running count of +9 as long as a deck OR less has been dealt. For a KO user, we don't see this advantage until a running count +16 (if you started at 0 like myself). Since TKO is true counted, we are then actually aware of points where a running count of +16 is NOT as advantageous as a KO user presumes towards the end of a shoe. Therefore, we actually see improvements in our betting ramp. I may be wrong, but these minor adjustments to KO could put TKO in the same ballpark as Hi-Lo. But I think TKO is barely simpler, because you just need to estimate the # of decks in the discard tray to figure out which betting ramp you use. Daniel Dravot made it as easy as possible to learn

That's just my little tidbit ---

Nevertheless, I still plan on switching to either ZEN or AOII. Can someone link me to another discussion or explain which outperforms which, specifically in a 6D shoe game?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top