Unbalance Zen

What are the card tag values for Unbalance Zen count?
Thanks

The count values are 2 through ace, the numbers at the end are the betting, playing and insurance corelations.

Zen    1  1  2  2  2  1  0  0  -2  -1       0.962  0.627  0.850 

UBZ II 1  2  2  2  2  1  0  0  -2  -1       0.965  0.616  0.845

Thanks for the info.
One question though: Zen is balanced, does that mean Unbalance Zen is UBZ II?
Thks

My original answer got orphaned or PBed --strange. You can convert to the orginal Zen by dropping the 3 tag from +2, to +1.

I use KO and at one point looked at UBZ II. Even made some practice cards. But man it was hard for me to get used to the two level system.

I am always a booster of getting a good sim program. Just need a counting system's tags and then you are able to simulate all the rest -- generate the decision tables and indexes, simplify it down to something manageable, know your edge for particular rules and pen. I was very impressed with how UBZ II outperformed KO for 1 and 2 deck games. For 6 deck games it was about a wash. But KO is just so easy to use, and I play infrequently so it hasn't been worth it. But if you have the time to learn and frequently play 1 or 2 deck games it looks like a great option. So many questions asked on these forums can all be answered with a good sim program (especially if you also have risk analysis as a part of it). I use Statistical Blackjack Analyzer and like it, but it doesn't have the risk analysis well integrated (just a spreadsheet that I found hard to use) and could be a bit more user friendly.

I think it was a global delete since Puiu was posting as Clark Cante & Clark Cantu. Hey these guys have a load to do and several of us get on the edge and typos happen.

That should have been left up for sure!

You asked that the post written by an imposter and signed as Clark Cante be busted and they were. The whole thread under that had to be busted as well. Nothing was wrong with pat's post, only it didn't make sense on its own. Stanford's rules say orphaned posts should probably be busted if they don't make much sense on their own.

Hope this helps.

Except in the post I made, still here, about that rehashed question. This night and last I had to do some library work on and offline and did more posting that usual. I do wish that Puiu's boasting about being so skilled at backing people off as a pit critter had been saved. Thanks again. I know I post on the edge and give you guys hell in the decisions that you thus have to make.