At 21forme’s request, a general outline of the FBM ASC Basic and Advanced (Featuring Dual Ramp System) is shown below. Initial info is somewhat elementary, but is shown to demo general thought progression. I promised a min 100 line discussion, which I might have made given more time. I preferred to be more compact in comments.

What is Basic Strategy
1 billion card sim accounting for all possible card combinations to arrive at a single playing strategy designed to minimize losses.

What is Card Counting
Keeping track of whether a deck is rich or poor in high versus low cards. Method is to maintain a running count. Utilizing an Ace Reckoned system, running count is then converted to true count. The resulting True Count then determines appropriate bet based on factors of player bankroll, rule set, deck pen, tolerance to risk etc. This strategy, used properly will produce a long term win over the house.

What is Index Strategy
1 billion or more card sim to arrive at multiple playing strategies, each strategy dependant upon actual True Count. Each individual true count has its own “basic“ strategy, of which many of these individual true counts vary from Basic Strategy. These individual basic (if you will) strategies are referred to as indices. This strategy, used properly in conjunction with card counting, will increase profits an additional 20-30% over the house.

What is Ace Reckoned True Count
In a balanced count, assigned tag values produce a running count. Running Count divided by Decks Remaning equals True Count.
RC/DR=TC

How does ASC help in an Ace Reckoned System
Not for betting - primarily for Insurance where thresholds may be adjusted up or down based on Ace surplus/deficit, and certain ace sensitive split and double decisions. FBM ASC Basic incorporates ASC.

What is Quality of True Count (use hi lo to most easily describe)
My own twist. Card Counting Systems measure ratio of hi to low cards. Little attention is paid to intermediate cards. Simulations do not distinguish the impact of intermediate density on results - they are simply a part of the whole. Quality of True Count, aka QTC, measures the ratio of high to intermediate to low cards. That ratio determines QTC and impacts betting levels. Essentially 5 card group (10,J,Q,K,A) is measured against 4 card group (6,7,8,9l and (2,3,4,5). Resulting proportions determine which ramp you should be on. Intermediates are tracked utilizing a letter system.

How does QTC affect betting in a standard ramp strategy
A typical ramp would see betting decrease or increase at designated True Counts depending on QTC.

How does QTC affect betting strategies utilizing a dual ramp system
Assume 6 deck shoe.
1. Determine ramp required to beat based on rules and deck pen.
2. Redo ramp based on what you think you can get away with.
3. Temper upper ramp if required (usually is) to max house tolerance.
Illustration
$25-$200,$250,$300
$50-$400,$500,$600
Using mid ramp as an example, do not misconstrue as 20-1 spread, rather as 2 distinctly individual 10-1 spreads. Typical dual ramp systems simply alternate ramps by individual shoes. You are still subject to the same percentage issues pertaining to positive and negative variance. FBM ASC Advanced with Dual Ramp System incorporates both ramps within the same shoe, usually determined by QTC. Deviations from this happen, at players discretion, in lower plus true counts usually in first part of shoe. Consider impact on longevity when increasing bet (lower to upper ramp) on a declining count. Can anyone determine FBM ASC Advanced underlying theory?

Importance of Record Keeping
Will determine if you’re okay with a simple ramp type system, or if you would benefit from a dual ramp scenario. Consider factors such as Dollar win/loss per session, percentage win, overall dollar win measured against sim. Other factors such as strength of bankroll need to be considered. I would suggest that only the most savvy of you can figure out the type of impacts one would experience utilizing dual ramp. To assist, review your current win loss stats against simmed EV, manipulate your win loss percentages against revised dollar win losses. I’ve built quite a collection of these calculations with the revised percentage cumulative win/loss and its effect on revised cumulative dollar win/loss calculated against revised dollar win/loss per session. Can anyone articulate underlying theory that propels overall results, and in general, what those results are?

Concepts developed over a period of years conceived by actual results, asking questions, developing for my own count system and understanding ideas of others that most of you have relegated to the junk pile - discarded due to lack of understanding.

If you want to expand your paradigms, reread a couple of times and ask away. Consider the possibility that the bullshit was not bullshit.