HiLo and betting

[blackjacktim]

I have been using Hi Lo and playing mainly in 6 to 8 deck tables. I play the lower minimum bet tables ($5 and $10) because I am new to this and trying to keep it simple. But it seems like I only rarely get a high enough positive count to warrant changing my bet because of the count. So I have been using a betting system where basically I increase my bet by one unit after a win, and then go back to the minimum bet after a loss.

Does anyone have any suggestions for what might be a better system? Or any comments on the system I am using? When I asked about a betting system here before I got a few responses about how betting systems are no good. Does this mean I should strictly adhere to the counting method I am using and only raise and lower my bet according the the true count?

[Intermediate]

Does this mean I should strictly adhere to the counting method I am using and only raise and lower my bet according the the true count?

The textbook answer is "Yes". You should only raise your bet when you have an advantage, and the True Count is a measure of your advantage. The True Count will get high enough for you to have an advantage only 25-30 percent of the time (I don't have the exact figure off the top of my head, but you can find it in the literature). Raising your bet after a win is just betting on a streak to occur.. That's voodoo.

[mrw464]

In addition to what Intermediate said, make sure you are comfortable with your abilities to count. I would suggest KO for 6-8 decks rather than Hi Lo due to the additional trouble of deck estimation and true count conversion. Raising your bets with no mathematical reasoning is "voodoo" and is frowned upon by AP players. You should be increasing your bets according to how favorable the True Count is.

[Three]

Or any comments on the system I am using? When I asked about a betting system here before I got a few responses about how betting systems are no good. Does this mean I should strictly adhere to the counting method I am using and only raise and lower my bet according the the true count?

I will comment on what you are doing first. Your system is counting strictly for playing decisions. Betting Correlation (BC) becomes meaningless and Playing Efficiency (PE) is the only benefit you are getting from counting. HILO has about the worst PE (.51) of any count. It does not fit your betting model when it comes to choosing a count. You would want an ace neutral count. Aces don't affect playing decisions much for an ace neutral count except a small percentage of matchups. Side counting the 7 would be a better idea than the ace for you because that has a much bigger impact on playing decisions while the aces biggest use is in betting decisions if you stick with your betting model. HILO's has 2 main strengths. It is really simple and it has a strong BC (.97). BC is very important for shoe games but PE becomes more important for pitch games (single and double deck games). I hope you can see given this information HILO is a very poor choice for your system.If you wanted to stick with your betting model HIOPT I is a much better choice for PE (.61) and even simpler since you have little use for the ace side count. If you wanted to use a level 2 count Zen is a good choice as it uses the ace as a minor high card counted half that of the ten value cards (PE .63). HIOPT II (PE .67) would be your strongest choice as it is ace neutral and the aces are of limited use to you as you are not betting with the count. Here is a fine chart for comparing counting systems which doesn't factor in the affects of side counting aces:

http://www.qfit.com/card-counting.htm

That being said you should bet with the shifting advantage. That is what will get you the money from counting. HILO is perfectly suited for that and reasonably good for shoe games. HILO's weakness is mostly when the count is negative to neutral and you have your minimum bet out if you bet with your advantage. If you avoid betting in these situations, which is called wonging, HILO becomes much stronger when you don't play these counts. Most of the Illustrious 18 indices are strongest with an ace neutral count but are negative or near neutral indices. When you avoid playing the counts that would use these index plays (the counts that don't give you an advantage) you will always play those matchups the same way. That makes HILO's big PE weakness minimized. Other counts may be stronger but as you point out they may cause errors or be too taxing in some individuals. By avoiding those counts that HILO is weaker than other counts you greatly improve the effectiveness of HILO relative to counts that are said to be stronger. My suggestion is to abandon your betting model and use HILO but avoid playing negative counts by switching tables or taking a break when this occurs. If you are playing pitch games this is less practical and you should aim for a different count in the long run. PE becomes much more important in pitch games and avoiding negative counts become far less practical for the HILO practitioner.

Here is a chart for comparing counts when you are factoring in ace side counts:

http://www.qfit.com/book/ModernBlackjackPage172.htm

You can see the value to betting and the harm to PE the ace has by comparing similar counts that are ace reckoned (counts the ace in the main count) or ace neutral (side counts the ace) or ace neutral (ignores the ace as in the previous chart) by comparing systems that have slight differences or the same ace neutral system that side counts or doesn't side count aces. Note this chart doesn't factor in the side counted ace in playing decisions where it does have some value and would affect Insurance Correlation (IC) and PE to a lesser degree if you use Ace side count playing adjustments.

[blackjacktim]

I will comment on what you are doing first. Your system is counting strictly for playing decisions. Betting Correlation (BC) becomes meaningless and Playing Efficiency (PE) is the only benefit you are getting from counting. HILO has about the worst PE (.51) of any count. It does not fit your betting model when it comes to choosing a count. You would want an ace neutral count. Aces don't affect playing decisions much for an ace neutral count except a small percentage of matchups. Side counting the 7 would be a better idea than the ace for you because that has a much bigger impact on playing decisions while the aces biggest use is in betting decisions if you stick with your betting model. HILO's has 2 main strengths. It is really simple and it has a strong BC (.97). BC is very important for shoe games but PE becomes more important for pitch games (single and double deck games). I hope you can see given this information HILO is a very poor choice for your system.If you wanted to stick with your betting model HIOPT I is a much better choice for PE (.61) and even simpler since you have little use for the ace side count. If you wanted to use a level 2 count Zen is a good choice as it uses the ace as a minor high card counted half that of the ten value cards (PE .63). HIOPT II (PE .67) would be your strongest choice as it is ace neutral and the aces are of limited use to you as you are not betting with the count. Here is a fine chart for comparing counting systems which doesn't factor in the affects of side counting aces:

http://www.qfit.com/card-counting.htm

That being said you should bet with the shifting advantage. That is what will get you the money from counting. HILO is perfectly suited for that and reasonably good for shoe games. HILO's weakness is mostly when the count is negative to neutral and you have your minimum bet out if you bet with your advantage. If you avoid betting in these situations, which is called wonging, HILO becomes much stronger when you don't play these counts. Most of the Illustrious 18 indices are strongest with an ace neutral count but are negative or near neutral indices. When you avoid playing the counts that would use these index plays (the counts that don't give you an advantage) you will always play those matchups the same way. That makes HILO's big PE weakness minimized. Other counts may be stronger but as you point out they may cause errors or be too taxing in some individuals. By avoiding those counts that HILO is weaker than other counts you greatly improve the effectiveness of HILO relative to counts that are said to be stronger. My suggestion is to abandon your betting model and use HILO but avoid playing negative counts by switching tables or taking a break when this occurs. If you are playing pitch games this is less practical and you should aim for a different count in the long run. PE becomes much more important in pitch games and avoiding negative counts become far less practical for the HILO practitioner.

Here is a chart for comparing counts when you are factoring in ace side counts:

http://www.qfit.com/book/ModernBlackjackPage172.htm

You can see the value to betting and the harm to PE the ace has by comparing similar counts that are ace reckoned (counts the ace in the main count) or ace neutral (side counts the ace) or ace neutral (ignores the ace as in the previous chart) by comparing systems that have slight differences or the same ace neutral system that side counts or doesn't side count aces. Note this chart doesn't factor in the side counted ace in playing decisions where it does have some value and would affect Insurance Correlation (IC) and PE to a lesser degree if you use Ace side count playing adjustments.

That was a great response Tthree, and I appreciate it. I have two problems with wonging: I am worried that it will be obvious that I am counting (which might not be a big deal in Tunica which is where I play), and mainly that the tables are usually pretty crowded when I have the chance to go. If I leave a table at low count, I might have to wait a long time before I can get back in a game.

Also, with HiLo, If I am waiting until +12 or +16 to change my bet at all, arent I going to be losing alot and not covering my losses? In other words, it seems like only increasing my bet by one unit for every true count at twice the number of decks, I am going to be mainly losing money. Is that wrong?

[Three]

If I leave a table at low count, I might have to wait a long time before I can get back in a game.

Ask for a lammer on your spot (ask them to hold it for you). If yo can't find another game pop back at the start of the next shoe. The important thing is to miss as much of the negative counts as you can. Your situation may not make it practical to miss them all. If you wong out to often they may figure out what you are up to. The closer you come to missing the all negative situations the better but missing as many as is practical is what you are shooting for.

Also, with HiLo, If I am waiting until +12 or +16 to change my bet at all, arent I going to be losing alot and not covering my losses? In other words, it seems like only increasing my bet by one unit for every true count at twice the number of decks, I am going to be mainly losing money. Is that wrong?

I am not sure I follow this comment but TC = Running count divided by remaining number of decks played. You lose money overall betting on TCs 0 or less. In S17 games you have a slight advantage at TC +1. For H17 games your advantage is minimal at TC +1. There are other rules and pen that affect this so this is over simplified and these numbers are for shoe games. Go to the BJ Resources in the tool bar above and click on it and then click on CVCX Online in the next tool bar and enter your game and count parameters in the drop boxes. It will give you an optimal playing ramp for your game and show you the advantages for the various true counts as well as a lot of other useful information. There is much to learn especially about the money management aspects of counting but that is a place to start. There is also a great free book written by the blackjack software genius Norm Wattenberger in the second tool bar. I recommend reading it. If you pursue counting you will read some other books as well.

[Zach Black]

Betting systems don't work. You need to increase bets when you have an advantage. Bet little or no bet with a dis advantage.

Hilo works fine for 6 & 8 deck games. You need to leave the table during negative counts. If you cant leave then have a massive spread which creates a virtual wonging effect.

Study chapter 13 in Blackjack Attack 3rd edition for more on optimal departure points.

Look at post KJ's #49 on this thread for suggestions on how to shape a bet ramp and unit.
http://www.blackjacktheforum.com/sho...on-Hi-Lo/page5

[Intermediate]

Also, with HiLo, If I am waiting until +12 or +16 to change my bet at all, arent I going to be losing alot and not covering my losses?

This statement makes me think you may not have a complete understanding of some fundamentals. I'm going to assume you know Basic Strategy. If you don't, I would hit your reset button and first learn BS before taking on counting. I wonder if all the good responses here are overwhelming. It pays to pick up "Professional Blackjack" by Stanford Wong for a structured discussion. It's tough to pick this stuff up in bits and pieces. I apologize in advance if you know all this stuff already....

It sounds like you are using the "Running Count", not the True Count to trigger a bet increase. As TThree says, in Hi-Lo, the True Count is the Running count divided by the number of unseen decks. If you've counted all the cards from the top of the shoe, then the number of unseen decks is the same as the number of remaining decks in the shoe. If you didn't see some rounds before you started the count, you have to include the cards from the previous rounds as unseen.

You will use the calculated True Count to size your bets based on your Bankroll and level of risk you are comfortable with. Bet sizing and Risk of Ruin is a whole other discussion. There are counting systems that don't use a True Count calculation, but I don't know anybody personally who uses just the Running Count in Hi-Lo. Using the True Count calculation, compared to just waiting till the Running Count hits +16, you may find more opportunities to increase your bet at points deeper into the shoe once the True Count >=2, e.g. With three decks unseen, a Running Count of +6 gives a TC=2 (6/3=2)

[Three]

That is the comment I didn't understand. I think you covered what I was thinking and did a fine job adjusting my TC equation to include the cards in the discard tray that you didn't see which I neglected to do. The OP seems to be using HILO only for playing adjustments and if he doesn't understand how to get TC to compare to the indices he is way worse off than if he simply used basic strategy.

[blackjacktim]

This statement makes me think you may not have a complete understanding of some fundamentals. I'm going to assume you know Basic Strategy. If you don't, I would hit your reset button and first learn BS before taking on counting. I wonder if all the good responses here are overwhelming. It pays to pick up "Professional Blackjack" by Stanford Wong for a structured discussion. It's tough to pick this stuff up in bits and pieces. I apologize in advance if you know all this stuff already....

It sounds like you are using the "Running Count", not the True Count to trigger a bet increase. As TThree says, in Hi-Lo, the True Count is the Running count divided by the number of unseen decks. If you've counted all the cards from the top of the shoe, then the number of unseen decks is the same as the number of remaining decks in the shoe. If you didn't see some rounds before you started the count, you have to include the cards from the previous rounds as unseen.

You will use the calculated True Count to size your bets based on your Bankroll and level of risk you are comfortable with. Bet sizing and Risk of Ruin is a whole other discussion. There are counting systems that don't use a True Count calculation, but I don't know anybody personally who uses just the Running Count in Hi-Lo. Using the True Count calculation, compared to just waiting till the Running Count hits +16, you may find more opportunities to increase your bet at points deeper into the shoe once the True Count >=2, e.g. With three decks unseen, a Running Count of +6 gives a TC=2 (6/3=2)

Thank you Intermediate that helps a whole lot. I thought that the True count was the Running count divided by the number of decks being used. In other words, for a six deck game, a running count of +6 will always be +1, +12 will always be +2 and so on. It helps a whole lot (and is obvious now that I think about it) that it is the remaining decks and not a constant.

I am definitely green, and probably do need to read a good book or two on the subject. I think I am fairly comfortable with basic strategy, but I still practice alot with the advice on (I also have a blackjack app that offers basic strategy adivce and I play it alot). I am not going to the casino much, I am playing alot of free games at home and practicing basic strategy and hilo (even though Ive been doing it wrong). I was really confused because I was seeing people talk about when the count was at +9 and +10 and I was thinking "how on earth could the running count ever get to +54 or +60?"

You guys are a lot of help, this is a great resource for someone like me who is just starting out.

[blackjacktim]

So is the correct way to use HiLo on a six deck game to bet the minimum until the true count goes up enough to bet more, and to wong out when the count gets too negative?

[Norm]

yep