If you count the number of plus ones and the number of minus ones above, you will come up with an end count of plus two instead of zero as a balanced count. An unbalanced count will usually have more plus cards than minus. In the case of the Red Seven, the two extra sevens counted (the red ones) at plus one means you end up with two extra plus cards per deck. To end at zero when the entire deck has been counted, the player has to start at minus two. Therefore, the starting count is -2 times the number of decks played. For a six deck shoe, one starts the count at -12. Once the count gets to zero, no matter how many decks are played, betting and playing adjustments are made.
This leads us to the purpose of the unbalanced count. It allows the player to skip the true count calculation. In doing so, the player eliminates a source of error – deck estimation. An example might help. You have played one deck of a six deck shoe. The count is -10. Since you know you have an extra -2 for each deck, the remaining decks are neutral. If the count goes to zero, this is equivalent to a plus two count, because there have been ten extra plus cards played, divided by the five remaining decks. Any time the count goes to zero before a shuffle, whether you have played one, two or five decks, you are at an advantage.
Mr. Snyder gave a betting schedule for 1, 2, or 4-8 (shoe) decks. A negative count is always a one unit bet. At zero, the bet goes to two units. For single deck play, the spread is 1-4. For shoes it goes from 1 to 8. He also gives strategy changes and insurance recommendations.
The advantages are that it is a level one system, and therefore, easy to learn, and you don’t have to calculate the true count. A disadvantage is that early in a deck or shoe, due to the negative starting point, some betting opportunities will be lost.
Mr. Snyder introduces what he calls the “True Edge.” Normally one divides the running count by the remaining decks to get a true count. The true edge is the running count divided by the remaining decks times two. The number yields the player’s advantage, or edge, in per cent. This is the same thing as dividing the RC by half decks. It was unclear to me why this was included with the Red Seven count, since you don’t have to estimate decks and obtain a true count with an unbalanced count. It is a deviation of the half deck division, which is a professional technique to calculate and bet one’s advantage. It would have been more appropriately used with Snyder’s Zen Count, which is a balanced, level 2 count.
B.C. .98 P.E. .54 I.C. .78
32. The K-O Count
Knock-Out Blackjack by Olaf Vancura and Ken Fuchs, 1998
This is also a level one, unbalanced count where there are four more plus one counts than minus ones. Vancura and Fuchs took the Hi-Lo count and unbalanced it by counting the sevens as +1. Thus, if you were to start at zero with a deck of cards, your final count would be +4. As with the Red Seven count, the purpose of the unbalanced count is to eliminate conversion from the running count to the true count and thus eliminate a source of error. Since hands don’t always end exactly at the end of a deck or even half deck, deck estimation is a source of error.
For this as with most unbalanced counting systems, the count generally starts with a negative number. For single deck play, the count starts at zero, but for each additional deck, the initial count begins at -4 for each additional deck. For example, in a six deck game, your starting count is -20. This means, when all of the cards of any number of decks are played, the ending count would be +4. As each deck is played, you gain +4 for the additional four sevens. This means you will be in negative territory for some time.
The authors give Key Counts for each number of decks. Below the Key Count, the minimum bet is placed. Above the Key count, the bet is increased in either a fixed or progressive manner. The six deck Key Count is -4. So, from a count of -20 to -4 one bets the minimum. This means that at times there will be missed opportunities.
To explore this further, I want you to look at the following scenario. It compares the K-O to the traditional Hi-Lo count.
6 Deck Game 1 Deck Played 5 Decks to go K-O starting count -20 Hi-Lo starting count 0 Ten extra small cards came out in the first hand K-O count = -20 +10 +4 (the extra 4 in the first deck Therefore, the K-O count is -6 Hi-Lo RC = +10 Hi-Lo TC = +2
As you can see, the K-O count is below the Key count of -4, so there would be no increase in one’s bet. With the Hi-Lo, the count is enough to increase one’s bet, and possibly make playing adjustments.
There is a difference between an unbalanced count and a balanced one, and most of these opportunities missed are early in a shoe. This is the trade off for not having to do a true count conversion. The unbalanced count is going to be more conservative in the early part of a shoe. Because of the dilution of multiple decks, being conservative might not be so bad anyway.
The advantages of this counting system are no deck estimation, and no true count calculation. The disadvantages are, you start in negative territory and it takes a while to get to your Key count and then raise your bets. Early opportunities could be missed.
B.C. .98 P.E. .55 I.C. .78
33. The K.I.S.S. Count
Blackjack Bluebook II by Fred Renzey, 2004
The author created a three step counting system which the player learns in stages. As one advances through the stages, more cards are counted and the betting efficiency increases.
Stage I Card R2 B2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Face A Card Value 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 -1 0
Where B2 are the Black 2s, R2 are the Red 2s, and Face are the face cards (K, Q, J).
This is the first stage of the three. This one counts about 60% of the cards of the point count, but, according to the author, has about 80 % betting efficiency. It is unbalanced with two extra small cards counted, the black 2’s. The count begins at:
Single deck…….18 Double deck……17 Four Deck………14 Six Deck………..10 Eight Deck…….…6
Because of the different starting points, once a count of 20 is reached, the player has the advantage. By having positive starting points like these, the player should not have to deal with negative numbers. The author gives betting advice, six basic strategy modifications, and an insurance count.
Stage II Card R2 B2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Face A Card Value 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 -1 -1 0
This stage is expanded to include the threes and tens. This increases the betting efficiency to 89%. The author gives a new set of starting counts for shoe games, expands the playing strategy modifications, and adds surrender indices.
Stage III Card R2 B2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Face A Card Value 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 -1 -1 -1
Stage III works you up to a high level count. The betting correlation is 96%, which is very high. This is somewhat similar to Snyder’s Red Seven count, so it should be comparable in power. The playing strategy remains the same as Stage II, and the betting strategy is changed ever so slightly. An insurance count isn’t given for this stage, but because the Aces are counted as -1, this might add one to the insurance index.
Editorial comments: I like the idea of growing from an introductory counting system to a near professional system. However, Stage I is about as complicated a system to learn as I have seen. I believe I would go straight to Stage III, and bypass the earlier two. Maybe I’m wrong, but I believe Stage I would require more thinking and therefore be slower to both learn and play. This is a new system, so time will tell if it catches on.
