Gosh, I`m glad I didn`t I post my thoughts on KO!
:)
Regards,
Syph
(p.s. I believe that UBZII was/is over-rated in the "ease of use" category. I though that was clear by the context in which I posted. My apologies for not making this clearer, I forgot my audience... UBZII is a fine count for pitch games, sub-par for backcounting, and worthless for shuffle-tracking.)
Using an unbalanced count has always seemed like a natural "fit" for me.
After it taking me nearly a year to master UBZII, I would have to agree regarding ease of use, or at least ease of learning to use. However, this would be true for any multi-level counting system.
It's efficiency for back-counting could be improved by using a true count conversion, and it could be used for shuffle tracking as well by doing this.
Alternatively, the only difference between UBZII and Snyder's balanced Zen count is the tag for the "3," so it would not be difficult for a UBZII user to convert to Zen.
and true count.why is it worthless for backcounting?the count starts off at -24 for the 6 deck game.i did a quick sim for the mirage game 20k bank 5/6 decks and wonged in with both counts at the first positive edge .zen had a DI of 8.21 135 an hour.ubz2 had a di of 7.96 and 127 an hour.i make 127 using the count as published w/o having to true count and you have to true count a 6 deck game and use a 2level count for a extra 7 dollars an hour.AND REMEMBER,to make that extra 7 bucks you have to convert to true like a computer does,which is perfect.true counting by humans is a estimation compared to a computer.i know with the ubz2 i will make the 127 as long as i dont screw up the count. i know everyone screws up the count once and a while but with the zen you will screw up the count And screw up the true.
Well, personally I wouldn't. UBZII is not useless for shoes, it (along with all unbalanced counts used in running count mode) is useless for shuffle tracking, where it is necessary to know the true count.
The only problem with UBZII and shoes is that (again, like all unbalanced counts used in running count mode) it tends to understate the advantage early in the shoe and overstate it late in the shoe.
Despite this, it works pretty well "out of the box." Still, if I were going to concentrate on shoes I probably would use a true count conversion.
I was certainly not suggesting that everyone (or anyone) should switch from UBZII to Zen, I was merely pointing out that, if one wished, for whatever reason, to switch to a traditional balanced count, going from UBZII to Zen would be a fairly simple matter.
Use Clarke Cant`s balanced count which simply tags "-1" to the nine.
I believe the PE and BC are .61 and .97, respectively.
Cheers!
Syph
(p.s. If I were to use an unbalanced count, UBZII would be my first choice. With a slight modification. I would, maybe, add a secondary count (+1/-1 for the Ace/Five for betting), ala Brh-1. I`m not certain of the value of that alone, however with a true count adjustment on top, it would certainly do well in simulations. Mind you, your head might explode...)
(p.p.s This from a guy who said UBZII was over-rated in the ease of use category...)
