New Vancura System

Has Vancura simplified the system presented in Knockout Blackjack? If so, how can I get more info?

It is just a bare bones low-caliber version of K.O.

It is called R.E.K.O.

"Real Easy K.O."

Making a simple system even simpler is a move in the wrong direction.

It can be found here: http://www.qfit.com/rekostrategy.htm

It has only one index number for all index variations. Despite the simplification, its performance is comparable to KO. In fact, it has slightly better performance in some scenarios such as 6 deck S17, DAS, LS at 4.5/6 and 5/6 penetrations.

Making a simple system even simpler is a move in the wrong direction.

Why? Simplicity is an advantage.

If you had said, "Making an ineffective system even less effective is a move in the wrong direction," that would have at least made more sense, but it doesn't apply in this case. reKO's effectiveness is, for any practical purpose, the same as that of KO. Even for professional players, a simple system such as KO or reKO is often the best choice, for reasons given in countless other posts.

Now, if your motivation is bragging rights (e.g. "I use a three-level system with an ace sidecount. How good are you?"), I can't argue with you.

David

..but as I recall, James Grosjean, in the first edition of Beyond Counting, stated that he had settled on K-O for his blackjack play and makes reference to V & F many times due to K-O's popularity. Several fellow board members I have met and corresponded with who use K-O seem to have a "guilt complex" for using this simple count. Now that it's been around for a while, I think it has come into its own.

I haven't read the Grosjean's latest edition, Exhibit CAA: Beyond Counting. If anyone has read it, just curious if Grosjean is still using K-O if he happens to mention it in the book?

Cobbson

absolutely.

I can never get away from the nagging feeling that Level One systems can fail to get the job done before one is tapped on the shoulder.

And he goes further into why...

He shows on a shoe game with 1-8 spread, KO actually outperforms HiLo!

I use KO and have never been ashamed to admit it. It gets the money! It's not so much the count anyway that gets the money, it's the way you play game. All reputable counts will get you the money if played correctly.

Fortunately, I've also had a great mentor that I've learned from...plus some really "good" games!

Regards,
PM

"He shows on a shoe game with 1-8 spread, KO actually outperforms HiLo!"

See BJA3, p. 174. Doesn't seem to be true.

But, these comparisons can be manipulated in a 100 different ways. Apples-to-apples is a very tricky thing.

Don

You think I'm going to get into a pissing contest between a couple of icons? You'll have to take this up with James...I'm just the reporter here! :)

In his book he does go into a number of points to try and show "apples" to "apples" though. I'd be interested in your take on his points, brokendown.

Regards,
PM

The REKO version of the KO count is the invention of Norm Wattenberger, developer of Casino Verite, CVCX, CVDATA and other gambling software products.

Neko

"In his book he does go into a number of points to try and show "apples" to "apples" though. I'd be interested in your take on his points, broken down."

I don't have his latest book. I have no idea what he has written. I just trust the sims that Norm and I have worked on over the years.

Again , there are a million ways to do these things, and there is no single "right" approach. I'm certain that, if you wanted an air-tight, reputable, sim, showing Hi-Lo to outperform K-O, I could get it. And, if you wanted just the opposite, I could get it, too! The fact is that, when you draw the SCORE graphs, they actually cross at certain points, depending on decks, rules, spreads, pen, etc. The two systems are close enough such that neither "dominates" the other, the way, say, Hi-Opt II would dominate either of them under all conceivable conditions.

Don

He's not comparing them, per se, but explaining that KO is a very good system to use in a number of different situations...I don't read that he's saying it is BETTER than HiLo.

Evidently he thinks very highly of KO...since he uses it.

Regards,
PM

Seriously? You don't want to read The Ultimate Rant?

for the reference to Norm's excellent work. Years ago I simmed a similar approach and concluded that one can use the same indexes regardless of the number of decks without losing much value and have been winning with my strategy ever since.