K-O: Beyond the Pivot Point

On those rare occasions where the count surpasses the pivot point, how accurate is the count beyond the pivot point?

I ask this because, as regards the key count, its accuracy, as far as I have been told, varies according to where one is in the game: very early in the shoe (I'm more interested in 6D games) the KC will be more advantageous than a Hi-Lo TC +2, later in the shoe the KC will be less advantageous, and very late in the shoe the KC will correspond to a negative TC [please correct me if inaccurate; I'm very much still a learner].

Does the same apply to the PP, or is it that the higher the RC the greater the accuracy?

Thank you.

I'm no expert either. But what I understand and quoting Fred Renzy from his book Blackjack Bluebook 2, when one is at the Pivot Point, we can be confident that we are at a Hi-Lo of TC +2. But when the unbalanced running count moves away from that Pivot Point in either direction, the count becomes less accurate as the "Key Counts" represent an average based on the centre of the shoe from what I understand. Unbalanced running count players can chose to True Fudge or True Count mode their systems according to Renzy. And quoting Renzy directly he says "So how much help is true fudging and true count moding? Unbalanced counts typically yield about a .05% lower net edge than balanced counts of similar card tag structure. Analysis suggests that fudging and t/c moding the unbalanced count regains around 75% of that difference. The vast majority of regained yield comes from t/c moding with 16 vs. 10 and fudging the high counts."

Renzy's book doesn't use KO.

It's true that Renzy does not use KO. He uses KISS which is pretty much the same as Red 7 and all too similar or arguably the same as KO. In the book he speaks about Unbalanced Counts as a group in general, and how and why they perform as they do.

Quote: Wino

I'm no expert either. But what I understand and quoting Fred Renzy from his book Blackjack Bluebook 2, when one is at the Pivot Point, we can be confident that we are at a Hi-Lo of TC +2. But when the unbalanced running count moves away from that Pivot Point in either direction, the count becomes less accurate as the "Key Counts" represent an average based on the centre of the shoe from what I understand. Unbalanced running count players can chose to True Fudge or True Count mode their systems according to Renzy. And quoting Renzy directly he says "So how much help is true fudging and true count moding? Unbalanced counts typically yield about a .05% lower net edge than balanced counts of similar card tag structure. Analysis suggests that fudging and t/c moding the unbalanced count regains around 75% of that difference. The vast majority of regained yield comes from t/c moding with 16 vs. 10 and fudging the high counts."

Thanks Wino for responding. I have a couple of points.

1. The pivot point corresponds to approximately a Hi-Lo TC of +4, not +2.

2. By "Key Counts", do you mean "key" as in the important ones, namely the key count and pivot point, or the actual key count?

So, you would say that the further the count moves away from the pivot point the more inaccurate it is even if it becomes more positive?

Hi Plato,

In response to your points, 1. Sorry, I didn't realize the the pivot point for Red 7 and KISS represented TC+2 vs. KO's pivot point represented TC+4. 2. By Key Count, I had in mind the Running Count index number to deviate from Basic Strategy that is recommended by say certain blackjack index generating computer programs. From what I have re-read from Renzy, yes as the unbalanced running count moves away from its pivot point, it does become more inaccurate even if it becomes more positive. You will be overbetting later in the shoe and underbetting earlier in the shoe by going by the unbalanced running count alone and not adjusting in some way. Similarly, Renzy says that playing deviations will also be inaccurate depending on where you are in the shoe; everything from Insurance, to Hit/Stand, etc.

Quote: Wino

Hi Plato,

In response to your points, 1. Sorry, I didn't realize the the pivot point for Red 7 and KISS represented TC+2 vs. KO's pivot point represented TC+4. 2. By Key Count, I had in mind the Running Count index number to deviate from Basic Strategy that is recommended by say certain blackjack index generating computer programs. From what I have re-read from Renzy, yes as the unbalanced running count moves away from its pivot point, it does become more inaccurate even if it becomes more positive. You will be overbetting later in the shoe and underbetting earlier in the shoe by going by the unbalanced running count alone and not adjusting in some way. Similarly, Renzy says that playing deviations will also be inaccurate depending on where you are in the shoe; everything from Insurance, to Hit/Stand, etc.

1. What blackjack index-generating programs are there? Are you referring to the CV suite?

2. As far as wonging in is concerned, at what point would you enter in a shoe game? My guess would be at or near the pivot point, as it is the most accurate RC value and most indices are played at or above this point. Would you agree?

Hi Plato,

1. I personally use CVdata to generate the indices for the Red7 count I use for the different games I play. 2. I'm just a hobbyist and so I'm not that sure how to answer. What's your max bet? Mine is $300 on a $25 minimum 6 deck shoe game with LS; small potatoes. My opinion is that the inaccuracies arn't that big of a deal since the system will get the money just fine. The difference will be in cents and not dollars. I'm not deep into the theoretical aspects of Unbalanced Counts at this time but I'll continue to read from other sources to eventually learn more because I find it interesting. I do notice that TC 2 for HiLo occurs twice as frequently as TC 4. Something to consider.

Quote: Wino

Hi Plato,

1. I personally use CVdata to generate the indices for the Red7 count I use for the different games I play. 2. I'm just a hobbyist and so I'm not that sure how to answer. What's your max bet? Mine is $300 on $25 minimum 6 deck shoe game with LS; small potatoes. My opinion is that the inaccuracies arn't that big of a deal since the system will get the money just fine. The difference will be in cents and not dollars. I'm not deep into the theoretical aspects of Unbalanced Counts at this time but I'll continue to read from other sources to eventually learn more because I find it interesting. I do notice that TC 2 for HiLo occurs twice as frequently as TC 4. Something to consider.

I don't have a bankroll at the moment. I'm playing with little money (betting table minimum) because my goal is to get casino practice. I've read numerous times about the weakness of the KC, so I'm always waiting for the count to reach the pivot point (which doesn't happen too often) to enter. Once playing, I flat bet because as the count stays at or exceeds the PP one should theoretically place their maximum bet. If the count dips, I leave. This type of game isn't great fun, but at least I get the casino counting practice without risking much.

If I were to enter at the KC and flat bet until the count drops below it, what would be the probability of going bust?

I sent you a message.