Questions for you
1. What are your thoughts on the Hi-Opt 1 counting system?
2. Is it worth taking time to learn the Hi-Opt 1 strategy that goes with the count?
3. How big a bankroll would a person need who wanted to average a win rate of $10.00 per hour?
4. What is the best system to use today against the 6, 8 & 10 decks?
Hi-Opt I was developed with great ease of use in mind, because
it is intended to be used with side-counts of 7's, 8's, 9's and Aces.
Doing so proves to be too difficult for us mere mortals. However ...
If used that way Hi-Opt I is quite strong in a "pitch" game with only
one or two decks, but not at all in a shoe game with 6 or 8 decks.
FAR superior is Hi-Opt II which requires a Side-Count of Aces
(and a recommended side-count of Sevens in "pitch" games.
It is extraordinary in "pitch" games and superior to any other
Level 2 Count for shoe games irrespective of the number of decks.
Feel free to contact me for more information.
1. What are your thoughts on the Hi-Opt 1 counting system?
OUTDATED !
2. Is it worth taking time to learn the Hi-Opt 1 strategy that goes with the count?
NO.
3. How big a bankroll would a person need who wanted to average a win rate of $10.00 per hour?
You have not given sufficient data (rules, penetration, etc.) to generate an accurate reply.
A simple "guesstimate" -- for a $5 game with poor rules and penetration, spreading 20-1
$4,000 to $8,000 will suffice, depending entirely on your tolerance for RISK !
4. What is the best system to use today against the 6, 8 & 10 decks?
That depends on how willing to study and practice you are.
"Best" is Hi-Opt II. Without having to side-count any ranks
at all ZEN is the preferred choice for shoe games.
There are no shoe games with 10 decks on this planet.
In which galaxy do you reside ?
Last edited by ZenMaster_Flash; 09-13-2012 at 10:47 AM.
Your thoughts on Hi-opt 1: Finally some common ground that we can agree on.Originally Posted by ZenMaster_Flash
I am not in agreement with your guesstimate of $4000 to $8000 for a BR spreading 1-20 at $5 game, even with your disclaimer about tolerance for Risk. That is just too low to be recommending. The risk will be too high.
There are no shoes with 10 decks on this planet? I have one!Maybe you meant, to say, "there are no 10 deck shoes in use by casinos on this planet." I don't know. You may be correct I haven't visited every place on this planet.
I have to admit, this thought is inspired from a line in the movie two weeks notice, where sandra Bullock's character says "you are the most selfish person on the planet", to which Hugh Grant's character replies "well that's just silly. Have you met everyone on the planet?"
10 deck shoes...even if there was one if there was 1 deck cutoff it would not be that much different from a 6 or 8 deck shoe with 1 cutoff in terms of EV...a little worse but not as much as you might think. Imagine a 100 deck shoe with 1 cutoff...think about the possibilities...you be sitting there with not much advantage or disadvantage for 80 decks...then you would either wong out or get 19 decks worth of monster count. I'd play that game....and if it was hand shuffled shuffle tracking would be an absolute breeze.
re: Hi-Opt I. I used to use it and High Low as a companion count using Hi-Opt 1 for single and double deck and High-Low for shoes. You can use the same set of index numbers for both. Hi-Opt 1 with Aces is more powerful than High-Low on pitch games and is really good for someone who side counts both Aces and 7's.
I switched to Zen sometime back and never looked back...especially when single deck mostly when extinct.
My feelings about Hi-Opt I come down to the simple facts of life on today's blackjack forums: Every couple of months, somebody starts a thread about adding an ace sidecount to High-Low - go over to blackjackinfo and search, if you doubt me - and asks for help on how to do it.Your thoughts on Hi-opt 1: Finally some common ground that we can agree on.
There are two correct answers to this question: (i) don't bother, because the extra pain in the ass of carrying an ace sidecount with High-Low has such low return that you'd be better off collecting aluminum cans and hauling them to recycling, or just using a level-2 count, the benefits of which are more tangible but still debatable; (ii) if you really are determined to sidecount aces with a level-1 count, then knock yourself out and do it right by starting with a non-ace-reckoned count designed for that kind of thing.
My take: if someone has decided to do something, and believes that the return is worth their time, then they should do it right, and I'll help them do it right, even if I question their decision to do it in the first place.
BTW, I believe that this forum has already seen its third thread on the subject of sidecounting aces with High-Low in its brief existence. I don't understand the appeal, but if it's because you hate losing so many insurance bets, then use Zen, which requires no sidecount of aces and gives a sweet insurance correlation. Problem solved!
Last edited by Anton Chigurh; 09-13-2012 at 12:55 PM.
Hi-Opt I and High-Low Sims:
Your post doesn't give the rules or playing conditions. I did Hi-Opt I and High-Low Sims with the following specs: 6 decks, 75% pen, DOA, DAS, LSR, H17, RSA, $10 Min, as this game is available on the Strip.
Bet 1 unit on TC<2, 2 units on 2<=TC<3, 4 units on 3<=TC<4, 6 units on 4<=TC<5, 8 units on 5<=TC<6 and 10 units on TC>=6. Use I18.
Results:
Hi-Opt I w/o Side Count - Win rate per hour: $6.25, IBA: 0.441, SCORE: 7.60
High-Low - Win rate per hour: $8.78, IBA: 0..580, SCORE: 12.17
High-Low outperforms Hi-Opt I w/o Side Count, but Hi-Opt I produces respectable results, with a little less effort. If you are new to card counting, then start with High-Low, rather than Hi-Opt I. If you are experienced and very proficient with Hi-Opt I, then it may not be advisable to change to High-Low.
With the ace sidecount - which is how you should use Hi-Opt I - they are roughly equal in shoes. In pitch, Hi-Opt I is a better choice.
My take: nobody should bother with Hi-Opt I if they play mostly shoes, unless ace sidecounting is so easy for them that it truly is easier to use than High-Low. The main count of Hi-Opt I is really easy, and if you can run the aces smoothly along with it, then you're golden.
Personally, I wouldn't bother.
I can't argue with anything you said, Anton. If I were to go back and look at some of those old threads, I probably would find some opinions by myself against side counting ace with hi-lo. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That's the whole purpose of selecting a count with the ace included. That said....I have now evolved to where I side count aces about 80% of the time while using hi-lo.In my defense, I didn't set out to side count. Didn't wake up one day with a revelation to start side counting. What happened was I moved to Vegas and started playing more double deck games. It started very casual. It is almost hard not to notice how many aces are played with double deck games. The next thing you know, I am side counting aces. And there is a little bit of value in it, especially with double deck games. Now my problem is that I don't play all double deck. Not even a majority of double deck. I play about a 70-30 mix shoe/double deck. But once you really start side counting the double deck game, you find yourself doing so in shoe games. I guess you could make a conscious effort not to, but that becomes even harder than just doing so. So now I side count most of the time, even though I don't see a lot of value in shoe games. If I get into a situation where I am playing 6 decks, heads up with a super fast dealer, or I get really engaged in conversation with players, dealer or pit, I will drop it.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks