You're entitled to ask for whatever you want, but realize that the comparison is badly flawed. Hi-Opt II requires a side count of aces because it doesn't count the ace in the primary count. Not keeping the side count cripples the system. CAC2 counts the ace in the primary count and, therefore, doesn't require the side count, which makes it much simpler. But Cac has never made the claim that his count will outperform Hi-Opt II when the latter is used the way it is intended to be used.
Don
Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.
I haven't looked at CAC-2 and I am sure it's a great system, but I have to say that Hi-Opt2 with ASC is a really powerful system that has never ceased to amaze me especially for 2D games where you can get 100+ SCORE fairly quickly with a moderate bet spread
Chance favors the prepared mind
“Hi-Opt II with an ace side count is superior to all systems that DO NOT use any side count, including CAC2 in its standard version.”
I swear I have not seen the CAC system. Furthermore, nobody has revealed to me any “secrets”. But the author himself revealed here at least two of the secret features of his system. One, Ace is counted; I guess -1. Two, the system is balanced. I would guess again. Either 6 is+2, or, surprisingly, 8=+1.
I’ve been reluctant to acquire the CAC system. I have a problem with self-deprecation. The penname of the author and the name of his system are cacophonic. Both sound awful to me. Cacarulo! CAC! Remind me of a self-deprecating versification in French about one Ninette and caca.
Having said that, I seem to be interested in the system. CAC was launched with fanfare in 2023. It is now 2024. Still waiting for an honest someone posting a real-life experience with the system. I mean, someone having played in a BaM American casino, especially. I would be interested especially in the author’s experience in the casino. Systems originate in real-life. No offence, just my honest opinion.
Bookmarks