There's nothing inherent in the nature of an unbalanced count that would lead to such a conclusion. If you had a gigantic RC after, say, two decks out of six, there simply would be no reason not to...
Yeah this.
A specific shuffle with a specific initial deck order will have a completely deterministic output unless some randomness is added. This is the basis of a lot of magic tricks.
This...
To be honest with you Don, I sort of thought the same way but, not only in his book but in previous articles/info that he wrote he it seems to be clear that deviations early in the deck are not...
I see no reason whatsoever to not use any deviations until three decks are gone. You're clearly giving up opportunities. What's so special about three decks? When you have a sufficiently high RC to...
I make no deviation plays until the the 6 deck shoe has at least 3 decks dealt. At 3 decks dealt and the RC is +4 you take insurance.. At 3 decks dealt out 6 or 2 decks dealt out of 4 and RC is -4...
Here's an intuitive way to do these calculations that works most of the time, when comparing to the Hi-Lo indices, which are +3 for insurance and +1 for doubling 9 vs. 2.
Your IRC with Red Seven...
he states taking ins. at pivot +2. when using the advanced red seven count he shows ins. at +4 (after 3 decks are gone out of a 6 deck shoe). i am assuming he means ins. at pivot +2 regardless of...