Cacarulo has written 2 articles in the "best of the masters section" one article talks about RA insurance the other CD insurance. I think these ideas are mutually exclusive. So which one? Perhaps TT vs. A as one of the more common hands can be used as an example?

I use the Halves count and 3.3 is my insurance indice for 6 decks and I was thinking right at the indice I would insure TT as an RA improvement. Especially since I tend to be aggressive.

Would the great compromise be if resize your bankroll frequently and bet approaching or at full Kelly then the RA insurance indices may be more appropriate but if you are more a fixed better with a low ROR then CD ins?

Also, especially with regard to the CD insurance given the amount of information. I would think the lions share of the advantage can be gained by only using TT vs A and T2,3,4,5,6 vs A CD?

thank you for your time