• Anyone familar with this new method? It is supposed to the the easiest ever.
    It is totally free. I got the basics very quickly. Is it too good tobe true?
    By Carlos Zilzer
  • It works. It is significantly worse than hi-lo, but then the effort to learn the counting system is significantly less as well. For the _very_ casual player that just can't count hi-lo or KO, OPP is a viable alternative. For anyone really wanting to win when you play, a stronger count like hi-lo, KO, or beyond are better choices...
  • It appears to be a very strong introductary card counting system. Very easy to learn and use,it should show you the potential money that can be made,although I think anyone who gets serious might progress to a stronger system when they have perfected it.
    BTW-People have, and are, paying $800 for a two day course on a very similar nationaly advertised course.
  • Thanks for the input

    I think I will start with this. I was going to go with KISS but if this is the same "advantage" I may as well start here.

    The site has free practice software and they are making a custom Basic Strategy.

    Plus if I do not have to pay $800 for it I am ahead already!
  • It's not as good as KISS. KISS has other advantages that make it a
    much better choice. If you learn KISS III you are very close to H/L
    performance and the upgrade for you to a balanced system may be
    a little easier. The unique nature of OPP makes it a dead end system in
    my opinion. But, having said that, something beats the hell out of zip.
  • I skipped KISS I and started out with KISS II without the indices. Within a few weeks I added the indices and within a few months I upgraded to KISS III. My wife and I find KISS III to be very effective. Good luck.
  • ditto-kissIII works for me like a CHARM!
    best of luck-
  • Hi-Low only has a 0.13% advantage over OPP in 8-deck, 0.18% in 2-deck. Granted, every little bit helps, but I wouldn't say that OPP is significantly worse.
  • There is some disagreement as to the numbers....OPP vs H/L. I think it
    amounts to OPP being about 1/3 of H/L. Don't hold me to those numbers
    but, if you consider the fact that the large cards are implied based on
    average distribution and OPP is lacking in index numbers, this seems like
    a reasonable value.
  • I prefer a direct comparison than a % comparison -- its just the spin. When something gives you a 0.2% advantage versus a 0.3% advantage, you can either say that the advantage only reduces by 0.1%, or you can say the advantage reduces by 33% (that is, a % of a %).

    No question hi-low is more powerful. But for the casual player, the actual advantage of hi-low over OPP is not that great for the time it takes to learn and the concentration it takes to implement, in my opinion.
  • The bottom line is this:

    If one can not learn to count cards, for any of a dozen reasons, then OPP is a viable alternative that produces a + advantage with minimal work.

    If one intends to really "take on" the casinos, whether it be for recreation for to make a living, a better count is essential, and Hi-Lo is a very good alternative that gives the most options. For example, most teams use Hi-Lo, so you are ready to join/start a team should that be of interest. It is a balanced count, making shuffle-tracking a logical next step, should that be of interest. Hi-Lo is not the only good answer of course, but it is definitely significantly better than OPP. But it is a bit more difficult as well. Given the choice of basic strategy or OPP, the answer clearly is for OPP.
  • I would just make one change to your bottom line, its not if one cannot learn to count cards, but if one does not want to count. For instance, in my case, I usually go to casinos with friends and enjoy chatting and having a good time while I'm playing. Plus I don't go enough to practice incessantly. Thus, a simpler count will enable me to still enjoy the game, but still shave off some of the advantage. Its not that I can't learn to count, but I don't want to.

    Under your theory, you should be doing a side count for aces and anything else to help the game and I hope you take lots of bucks from the casinos. The effort just isn't worth it for me, although I find counting interesting.
  • Personally I don't side-count aces any longer. It helps the insurance decision, and playing decisions like doubling 11 vs anything (don't want an A there of course). But it can lead to errors/mistakes that can offset the gain and then some.

    However, there really is a group of people that just can't count cards. For reasons from not playing frequently enough, to those that just can't manage the process in a casino setting. Many "won't count" as you mention. But there are some that really "can't". And those can take advantage of OPP and at least play with an edge, albiet a small one. But an edge of any kind is better than nothing, and BS is certainly worse than nothing here since it is a -.5 edge by itself...
  • I think the OPP count, Renzey's A/10 count and Mr. Nickels A/5 count
    are all good options, depending on your objective. If I were just starting
    out at the game, the A/5 would be my selection for several reasons.

    - two cards, how easy can it get
    - the method is well described
    - you can grow it from A/5...Ak/45....AKQ/456....AKQJ10/23456..wala H/L
    - True or not to true depending on you progress.
    - Variations/or just B/S

    - Last but not least....advance at your own speed
  • Ray,
    How important is the addition of index plays when using Hi/Lo or any other counting method? I read where some players memorize 30, while others know and use over 100. Is this a factor in measuring a good counter from a not so good counter?
  • 80% of the benefit comes from the I-18 + surrender indices. If you want to memorize Wong's complete set of indices for that remaining 20% feel free. :) The majority of the benefit comes from proper betting. Insurance and 16 vs 10 are the most important to use. As you play, you will probably add the + indices for doubling at least, since that deals with more money...
  • PJ- It depends on the game you play. If you play single or DD the more
    you know the better. In these games, the variations are more accurate
    and so is basic strategy. As you move up in decks the effect is less and that combined with the long playing time at a negative EV is why you need to bet more and be more flexible in the shoe games. So, to answer your question, I would say that, in all games,you should have command of 40-50 variations even when the effect is marginal. This allows you to use one system for all games with reasonable expectations.
  • SSR - You said twice that OPP is significantly worse than Hi-Lo. Do you know this for a fact or are you just quoting somebody else? This doesn't 'mesh' with my personal findings.....see below.

    Ray/Funky Chicken - I saw the early disagreement about the numbers too, but after looking into the OPP for the last few days I think FC is correct about OPP being about 80%+ as effective as Hi-Lo.

    I talked for two hours Sunday with a player friend in LV who has already played it 'live' in casinos. He walked me through the complete method and the spreads he used, etc. ....then Fed-X'd me everything he had on it.

    I spent Monday and Tuesday analyzing it and playing it for about twenty hours here in my office (hand dealing and CV) to get a feel for the "flow" of it. Some observations:
    - It is incredibly easy to learn and use. Probably three/four hours maximum for anyone who has counting experience....then another few hours to get "comfortable" with it.
    - The accuracy of the betting decisions was much higher than I expected from a method so easy. I tracked it vs Hi-Lo and Red7 and and the ramp decisions were essentially parallel........And this supports Funky Chicken's numbers above and my friends belief that it plays to at least 75% of Hi-Lo.

    Just sharing some thoughts on what I observed......Hope it helps someone.

  • The depth of knowledge here is incredible.
    Based on what I have read it appears that OPP is just the ticket for a receational player like me.

    I ordered CV and will practice with it when it arrives. Based on what I read in some older posts here it seems CV (lite) was the best choice for me.
  • My data on Opp came from posts by several well-known people. Arnold is one, but then Mathprof, Cacarulo, Norm Wattenberger, etc all did sims, and if you compare hilo with at least the I-18 BS indices plus the fab-4 surrender indices, against OPP which has no indices, then all reported that OPP came in at under 50% of the winning rate of Hi-Lo. But OPP _did_ win, which is the point for such a simple system.

    I've not run any sims myself, since I already use Hi-Lo and am comfortable with it and don't see the need for something easier than "easy" already (IMHO of course). But for someone wanting to play casually, once or twice or so a year, OPP might just be the ticket since it is easy and doesn't require the same amount of practice as hi-lo or KO or whatever.

    I completely agree with your "ease of use" comment, which is, I think, the point for using this counting system at all. And BC is pretty good, I have seen 75-80% of HiLo in that regard certainly. But then the playing indices add to that and OPP doesn't have 'em (yet) although Carlos is working on some along with others.

    So, I suppose the point is that whether it is 75-80% of Hi-Lo, or 50% of Hi-Lo, it is a system that produces a +EV and is far easier to use than a true-counted system, at least for many. That can't be bad, which is why I have not had anything bad to say about it. It isn't the count I would use, but that is just me. There are quite a few using level-2 and level-3 counts and to me, they are too much effort for the amount of playing time I put in. Once I retire, assuming SD/DD is still alive and well, I might re-think that since better counting systems work better at SD/DD where playing decisions are more important. But for most, playing against shoes (not against CSMs of course), OPP is viable, IMHO. And I'd suggest anyone planning on visiting a casino should give it a look. Playing with a +EV is a whole new ballgame compared to pure BS.
  • Lorenzo:

    Only thing I can think of that is a negative to your post is that I don't see how you can use CVBJ to do anything other than just play. That is, it won't, to the best of my knowledge, allow you to select "OPP" and then have it nag you if you blow a bet ramp, since it doesn't understand the OPP principal, which is not just "tags" for specific cards...

    But you can certainly play, you will just have to police yourself to make sure you are not screwing up the betting which is where your edge will come from.
  • Rustproof Rodent - Yep, I kind of figured that's where you got your info; and your post is accurate except (1) You failed to include that the guys you mentioned are still arguing about whose numbers are right. (2) I respect everyone you mentioned, but don't forget there are a ton of really good blackjack minds out there who are working on this method; but do not post on public forums or run a website. If you are not dialed into a few of them, you are not getting the whole picture.

    Don't take my word or others about the "ease of use". Sit down tonight with some decks and chips and check it out for yourself.


    p.s. What do you personally use as the added EV of just I18/F4 in your six deck play?
  • Some new theory like OPP is going to gen some disagreement at first.
    The truth will prevail and is more likely somewhere in the middle. At any
    rate, you can see why I said, don't hold me to those numbers.............
  • Grifter: Hopefully you know by now that "my 6 deck play" is pretty limited. I hate shoes. I really search for SD/DD (DD is more common of course, for good games) and try to play those. But I will answer your question after I reboot my laptop and bring up windows (I am on linux now, my preferred system) so I can get to my archived sim results. I'll answer that question in a bit by comparing a good 6D shoe (MGM-type rules with LS, S17, etc) with no indices, with I-18, and with full indices...

    I have at least looked at OPP. I haven't sat down to try it, but I certainly agree that ease of use is way up there. Several APs (ETfan, bfbagain, radar, etc, all on arnold's site) have endorsed it "as the system they would suggest to their friends that don't/won't learn a more traditional counting system like hilo/KO/etc... pretty good recommendaton IMHO...

    As far as tje arguments go, it really is hard to tell which end is up. There is much more than "just BJ math" being argued. Lots of personality issues, past history, etc, which makes it difficult to separate wheat from chaff at times. :)

    Lke the "rustproof rodent". :)
  • OK. some data.

    Game: 6D, S17, DAS, DA2, LS, 5/6 decks dealt (83% pen), spread 1-20 using $10 units, heads-up (one player). (game I played at the MGM in 2004 although S17 is getting harder to find)...

    Hi-Lo, full (Wong) indices, Hourly win rate $52.35

    Hi-Lo, I-18 + F4 indices, Hourly win rate $49.33

    Hi-Lo, no indices, Hourly win rate $40.26

    So it looks like I-18 + fab4 adds about 25% to hilo with no indices of any kind, just pure BS. Going beyond the I-18 doesn't add very much at all, another three bucks...

    Hope that helps...


  • FunkyChicken said:
    Hi-Low only has a 0.13% advantage over OPP in 8-deck, 0.18% in 2-deck. Granted, every little bit helps, but I wouldn't say that OPP is significantly worse.

    No, HiLo has about 300% the SCORE of OPP. The published numbers are way off.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!