KO with Table of Critical Running Counts

“ Cacarulo invented the monkey count for Spanish 21”
I always thought Automatic Monkey invented it.

Quote: Hunterhill

“ Cacarulo invented the monkey count for Spanish 21”
I always thought Automatic Monkey invented it.
link to original post

I did. The simple version of it simply counts the ace as -2 to represent the very high EOR of the ace. There are also unpublished multiparameter versions of it.

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: Hunterhill

“ Cacarulo invented the monkey count for Spanish 21”
I always thought Automatic Monkey invented it.
link to original post

I did. The simple version of it simply counts the ace as -2 to represent the very high EOR of the ace. There are also unpublished multiparameter versions of it.
link to original post

Sorry about that Automatic Monkey. Cacarulo just commented on my statement that the Monkey Count destroys playing strategy variations in Spanish 21 and he agreed. So I just assumed the was the author of Monkey Count..

I suggest using the Katarnia Walkers unbalanced HL (for Spanish 21 HL is unbalanced at 4 per deck just like KO is unbalanced at 4 per deck for blackjack) and use a 5mAc side count. Then use HL for playing strategy variations and brc = HL + 5mAc for betting. This is another reason to learn TCRC as a TCRC can be used for Spanish 21 HL. Walker used the same complicated formula to calculate HL true counts as Cacarulo did for TKO for KO true counts. Use a TCRC, much simpler and you get the same true counts .

This discussion is for KO with TCRC so I will not be covering Spanish 21 here other than to say what I mentioned above about Spanish 21.

Also for blackjack, KO is a much better primary count to add plus/minus side counts to than HL is. So another reason to learn KO with TCRC.

But I also did analysis on side counts to HL since I figure no matter what i say about KO with TCRC many readers will refuse to switch as they love HL.

So on BlackjackReview I published HL with 7m9c which can be used for both the shoe game and two deck game.

The Blackjack High-Low Count with 7m9c
October 13, 2024
[ Comments from Don Schlesinger ]
A very ambitious piece of work! Thank you for sending. Improvements in SCORE are impressive

So if you want to keep HL then add 7m9c as a side count.
.
Don S does not like me because he told me that he can guarantee that CC will not help at all with the SCORE. Gronbog then did around 20 siims of KO and HL with side counts and every time the weighted CC or betting CC increased the SCORE increased. So Don was upset that I showed that he was wrong and ever since then he says negative comments about me. .

I must make sure that both the EoR numbers and your CC numbers are correct. You actually cited all Don’s EoR numbers wrong, because you flipped the sign of each original number:

For the hand 15vT Hard Hitting,
Card = {2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 T A}
EoR = [0.1873 -0.3168 -0.7279 -1.7532 -2.2287 -0.537 0.0853 0.6642 1.1992 -1.1699].

Why do you flip the sign? Ultimately, I want you to figure out how these numbers are calculated. I haven’t read into this part yet.

The EoR are the difference between two choices. In the case of hard 15 v T the choices are hit or stand.
For hard 15 v T, EoR in BJA was for hit - stand.
This can be seen, for example, in EoR if a six was removed is negative at -2.2287
So a six being removed make hitting hard 15 v T less desirable, thus the EV of hitting decreases if a six is removed.
What you want is stand - hit, for standing decision on hard 15 v T. Thus the signs are flipped.
The calculated HL indices using Excel spreadsheet and using EoR from BJA agree with published HL indices. The calculations are correct.

I looked into "How to Use the Tables" in the book Blackjack Attack and found this description: In the "Hitting" section, we are considering the favorability of hitting our holding exactly one time, as opposed to standing. I believe this description is not accurate; when hitting, player may hit multiple times.

If I use Wizard online blackjack calculator to calculate, I get a different set of EoR numbers. Furthermore, the player hard 15 may have three different 2-card combinations: (10, 5), (9, 6), and (8, 7), while each combination gives a different set of EoR numbers.

More puzzling to me is this part. If using the optimal strategy, each set of EoR values do not add to zero. I hope you think about these things and help me understand.

Perhaps we should count 4-5-6-7 vs. 10-values... sheesh whadda nitemare.

Quote: aceside

If I use Wizard online blackjack calculator to calculate, I get a different set of EoR numbers. Furthermore, the player hard 15 may have three different 2-card combinations: (10, 5), (9, 6), and (8, 7), while each combination gives a different set of EoR numbers.
link to original post

I am not an expert on EoR. I think it some type of weight is used for each hard 15 v T configuration and I think I remember reading in BJA that some type of least squares technique was used in calculating the Eo
I am not the one to tell you how EoR were calculated but it seems to me to be quite complex. The only one I was personally able to calculate manually was insurance which is linear and simple. You will have to consult others on other EoR calculations which are not linear.

All I can tell you is that based on multiple Gronbog sims of KO and HL with side counts and based on Cacarulo's sims of TKO (which produces the same true counts as KO with TCRC) is that using EoR published in BJA works which is all that the vast majority of users care about. .

If you want to have a simple improvement to HL or KO then simply add 7m9c as a side count to HL (for HL users who do not want to switch to KO) or add 5m7c as a side count to KO both of which I discussed earlier.