Card,
Thanks for the clarification. Could you tell me how/if you use the Ace Count to help you with your betting and strategy decisions, thus making Hi-Lo even more powerful? (other than Insurance)

Good Cards,
GT

> GT, maybe I have confused you. Here's
> exactly how I do it disregarding the side
> count of aces for the time being to not
> muddy the waters.

> First I start with a base count of 20 which
> is actually 0. I do this so i don't have to
> wander from positive to negative number
> territory constantly. Prior to the start of
> a hand, I simply disregard the 20 base ie;
> 28 becomes +8 or if at a running 32 is +12,
> 16 is -4 etc. Lets say after 2 decks are
> played from a 6 deck shoe, my running count
> before the next hand is now 28...so i am
> actually a running +8 which I then convert
> to a True count of +2 and bet accordingly.
> After I convert the running count to a true
> count, I use the regular index numbers ie;
> I-18 etc for playing decisions.

> For the side count of aces for insurance, I
> do it as I described in my above post and
> AFTER the ace overage/shortage calculation
> is done and either added or subtracted from
> the running count, (disregarding the initial
> 20 base figure)
> I then convert the total to a true count and
> use the regular hi/lo indices of +3 to buy
> insurance.

> Here's the sequence of events which may be
> clearer... whatever the running count is
> prior to betting (after subtracting the 20
> base) I convert to a true count and bet,
> cards are dealt, if the dealer gets an Ace
> up I take the running count at the time the
> dealer received his down card, (once again
> removing the 20 base), apply the ace
> overage/shortage calculation and then
> convert it to a true count to determine if
> I'll buy insurance.

> If he doesn't have the blackjack, I simply
> back out the insurance overage/shortage
> calculation from my running count and
> proceed with the running count converting to
> a true count prior to my hand decision and
> apply the indices to determine my play.

> Additionally, you may find it easier and
> faster to multiply rather than divide to
> convert your running count to a true count.
> For example, if you have 3 decks remaining
> from a 6 deck shoe you know you must have a
> running 3 to have a true 1, a running 6 to
> have a true 2, running 9 to have a true 3
> etc. that way you're always dealing with
> whole numbers and since you are trunicating
> anyways the fractions caused by dividing
> aren't needed or used anyways.

> Best regards,

> Card.