K/O or Hi-Lo??
  • Hello, I am wondering if anybody has any experience using the K/O Knock Out Blackjack count system on a 2deck BJ game???
    I first liearned the Hi-Lo System but you have to do true count conversions, and K/O unbalanced c ount supposedly does the true count conversions for you..The most of all question i'm concerning is K/O really good for a double deck game??
  • Mighty Joe BJ - Yes, KO is good for double deck. Your EV will be essentially the same as Hi-Lo.

  • Grifter thanks for your reply.. also i'm wonder if I got the right system for the knock out counting system is 2-7 are + and face cards - ?? I looked on the internet to find the system and i'm just wondering if thats right. cant be to sure of what people write on the net theese days.. Also can you link to any strategy charts for the K/O s ystem? when I use the K/O system to pratice with I always come up with +7 at the end is that right since its unbalanced count and it does the true count conversion for you? Thanks
  • I think you mean +4 per deck since there are 4 more low cards than high cards? That's why the IRC starts off at a negative number that depends on the number of decks.
  • Joe -- the KO Count counts 2's thru 7's as +1 and 10's thru Aces as -1. It's unbalanced by one full card rank so that for every deck that's dealt, the running count on average will rise 4 points. By starting your count at a negative number, it makes a running count of +4 equal to exactly +4 true at all deck depths. Above and below +4 RC however, inaccuracy begins to creep in, as it does with all unbalanced counts.

    I honestly and sincerely would recommend the KISS III Count over KO for a few reasons.
    First, it's unbalanced by a half card rank rather than a full card. By that nature, the point where its running count is perfectly accurate is at +2 true rather than +4; which occurs three times as often (in a shoe game).
    Second, because of its less radical unbalancing, you begin all your counts at a positive number rather than negative, and anytime you reach an RC of "20", your true count is roughly +1.5, while at an RC of "21", it is always a true count of exactly +2.
    Third, KISS III actually outperforms KO by a smidge while tracking only 10.5 ranks of cards rather than 11.
    And four, the KISS Count comes with additionally illustrated fine-tuning techniques (in B/J Bluebook II) that will elevate its performance beyond that of any other single level count, balanced or unbalanced (in shoe games).
  • Thank you for all your're posts, I am playing with Double Deck and I need a good counting system that will do a true count conversion. Please give me detial intrustions thanks...
  • My advice is always the same, and is the advice I followed when I started this a few years back, namely "hi-lo". The "true count conversion problem" is more an urban myth than fact. All you need to do is practice. Buy CVBJ, and practice regularly. In a DD game the TC conversion is trivial. I use 1/2 deck resolution for the first deck, which means that I multiply RC by .5 after the shuffle, then after 1/2 deck has been played, multiply by .75. At the one deck point RC = TC, and then you can continue using 1/2 deck resolution or drop to 1/4, which is more accurate when playing single-deck games. Once you do this regularly, you won't think about it. Somehow you will just "know" that with a RC of 4, with 1/2 deck already played, the TC is 3, without thinking about it.

    The main + for hi-lo is that the big majority of card counters use it, which means you can "talk" to them in a common language. Discussing indices with a hi-opt2 user requires some adjustments. Even more so for KO or other unbalanced system user. I personally use hi-lo for everything, from SD to DD to shoes. And it works just fine. A multi-level count for SD/DD would be better, as with a better playing efficiency, you can get by with a smaller spread and run less risk of getting caught. But hi-lo will, as the saying goes, "get the money just fine."
  • If you're an occasional player, stick with the shoe games and don't even
    consider DD. KISS, A/5 or Renzey's A/10 are user friendly and easy to retain
    if you don't play often. Anyone can learn the few variations and the bet
    methods that are defined for these systems.

    Serious players/gamblers: ZEN, Wong Halves, Renzey's Mentor are the three
    best options IMO. ZEN and Mentor are better for both games (pitch/shoe)
    because of the PE. These are level 2 & 3 system and are just a little harder
    to grasp initially. True conversion is simple if you don't plan on adopting some
    of the more advanced concepts that Renzey uses. Renzey goes a long way to
    justify 80 variations and to configure true conversion accross all games and
    the number of decks.

    If you already know a system like H/L the above efforts may not be justified
    unless you play single and DD exclusively. Not many people do that.
  • Joe -- Here's a list of various count systems along with their percentage edge (EV) in double deck play using a 1-to-6 betting spread. Also included is info as to whether its balanced (needing a true count conversion), or unbalanced (no true count conversion needed) and my opinion of the relative difficulty factor (form 1-10) involved in learning the system. The proformas are from pg. 194 of "Bluebook" and were run for 200 million hands each under identical conditions.

    KISS I +.45% -- (unb, lev 1) -- 2
    KISS II +.63% -- (unb, lev 1) -- 3
    KISS III +.69% -- (unb, lev 1) -- 4
    KO full matrix +.69% -- (unb, lev 1) -- 4.5
    HI/LO +.74% -- (bal, lev 1) -- 6
    UBZII +.73% -- (unb, lev 2) -- 5.5
    HI OPT II +.80% -- (bal, lev 2) -- 8
    Mentor +.82% -- (bal, lev 2) -- 9
  • Joe -- your main decision is whether you want to do true count converting (as with a balanced system) or if you're willing to sacrifice the approximately05% shoe to .07% DD in EV to play strictly by the running count (unbalanced system).

    Remember, unbalanced counts do make the true count conversion for you, but there is some error in their doing it. By the way, there also has to be some human error in manual true count conversions with a balanced system. So the actual performance differences between balanced and unbalanced simulations is somewhat smaller in real life.

    Besides that, if you become familiar with the actual error ranges in "true count-to-running count" at various deck depth levels, you can "fudge" your bet sizes and index plays so that after all is said and done, there is virtually no performance difference between balanced and unbalanced systems of equal card tag complexity.

    This last step, "true fudging" is thoroughly outlined in the "Art and Science" chapter of Bluebook II, and is aimed at the KISS III. The one drawback to unbalanced counts however, is that you need separate index tables for hand held and shoe games.

Howdy, Stranger!

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