I would like to get details on FBM system so I can run Correlation Coefficients on it

[seriousplayer]

The well designed investment portfolio contains stocks through a variety of industries and at a variety of risks corresponding to the investors comfort level. I carry stocks in financial, real estate, Utilities, transportation, entertainment etc etc etc, mostly conservative though some with a degree of speculation.

FBM ASC Accessories Corporation - TSX FBMA - is one such speculative stock, This hand held stock is reputed to have a virtual unlimited supply of marketing opportunities centred around its Flagship product.

(Not intended as solicitation - Contact your investment advisor for professional guidance)

LMAO! I already have stocks and retirement plan. I was referring to other valuable investments.

[bjanalyst]

This all may be true and your math analysis could be spot on but I think you're missing part of the point. Half the game, if not more, is getting away with it and your longevity with a good game. With a simple count like HL it's much easier to act like a normal loser, chatting and taking your eyes off the cards. Try that with a level 2/3+ count and I think you'll struggle. What you gain on the swings I bet you'll lose on the roundabouts; and the roundabouts are much more fun and will make you more money in the end

It is not just the extra blackjack edge that is of concern.

There is aloo reduced risk playing with stronger system so there will be more winning sessions and less losing sessions.

There is also cover play making strange plays that are correct that you would never make with the HL and the casinos use the HL to track to see if you are a counter. I explained some of these plays in a previous post.

And there are the side bets of Lucky Ladies and Super 4 where I have made a lot of extra money and which also reduce risk.

With the HL the Super 4 CC is only 61%. . The HL is not good for the Super 4 bet. With KO w AA89mTc and 5m9c I use S4c = Super 4 count = KO - (AA89mTc + 5m9c) which as a S4 CC of 85%. And for Lucky Ladies you need a Ten count. HL has only 76% efficiency for a Ten count. Tc = KO + AA89mTc has 100% Ten count efficiency. I keep KO with AA89mTc and 5m9c. Using just KO I could see that there would be many instances where I would not be betting Lucky Ladies or Super 4 when I should and there would be instance when I was betting Super 4 or LL when I should not have been betting it.

Finally I use chips for the side counts so there is no extra mental strains. I just keep KO In my head. So it is super simple to use and the true counts at 3, 4, 5 and 6 where large bets are made are more accurate with KO than with HL as I also explained earlier.

The KO w AA89mTc and 5m9c is about the best you can get using two side counts.

Remember Tarzan's system is extremely complex and KO w AA89mTc and 5m7c (Gronbog tested with 5m7c but 5m9c are almost equivalent) essentially tied Tarzan's count for the No LS game.

I started a separate post where I asked for simulation of Tarzan's count for LS so I could compare with the simulations for KO w Aa89mTC and 5m7c for LS.

Here is what Gronbog said:

At the time, LS sims were run for some 6 deck games and the results were delivered to Tarzan. It's up to him whether these results will ever be published and in what form.

So Tarzan had his sim for the no LS game published but did want want his sims for the LS game published.

That makes me wonder just how the Tarzan count performed for LS. Probably not very well so it is not very versatile.

By taking various linear combination of KO, AA89mTc and 5m9c you can get derived counts that help with many difference situations and side bets.

I was just playing today the six decks, five decks dealt, S17, DAS, LS, Super 4 and Lucky Ladies game and I had AA with dealer blackjack and bet Super 4 so I won $750 on a $5 bet. Using just KO I would have never bet the Super 4. I bet the Super 4 because I was using the Super 4 count.