More Indices or Higher Level Count

[bjanalyst]

Would it be better to use a higher level count (like Wong Halves) and forget about using more indices than the catch 22. Is there some break even point where learning a higher level count is better than adding any more indices? Any studies done on this?

The problem with higher level counts is that once you choose tag values of each count, those tag values have to be used for betting and every playing strategy situation. By using a primary count and side count you can take linear combinations of the counts and get a smorgasbord of counts to choose from and you chose the derived count that maximizes the CC between the EoR and tag value of that derived count and then calculate the index for that derived count using LSL technique.

Gronbog had simulated KO with 5m7c and AA89mTc derived from my technique described above and it left HO2 w ASC in the dust.

I have developed a similar count for the HL which is HL with 5m9c and AA78mTc which using my CC comparisons which have proven to be extremely successful and in line with simulation results, I predict HL w 5m9c and AA78mTc will also smash HO2 w ASC and perform similar to KO w 5m7c and AA89mTc.

So rather than learn dozens of indices for HL or Wong's Halves, you would be better off sticking to I18 and add 5m9c and AA789mTc as side counts to the HL. Of course, you can also add more indices for HL w 5m9c and AA78mTc beyond the I18 but even is you restrict yourself to the I18 which would limit the SCORE of HL w 5m9c and AA78mTc I still think it would beat HO2 w ASC with all indices and now you just have the I18 that needs to be remembered and keep 5m9c and AA78mTc with the HL.

I emailed Gronbog a draft copy of my analysis of HL w 5m9c and AA78mTc which he can make comments on and share with Don or Norm if he wishes.

[Norm]

The problem with higher level counts is that once you choose tag values of each count, those tag values have to be used for betting and every playing strategy situation.

That's not a problem. That's an advantage. Vastly simpler than what you are talking about.

[bjanalyst]

That's not a problem. That's an advantage. Vastly simpler than what you are talking about.

Keeping the level 3 Wong's Halves is not easy as far as I am concerned, it is very, very difficult and prone to errors and mentally exhausting as well.

I have been keeping KO with side counts for years using chips with zero problems and zero heat despite my obvious moving chips around. My friend who does not want to use chips because he said it would draw heat from the casino has been bared from several casinos based on his HL play and betting. I use KO with side counts which has built in cover plays that are correct but look like errors to the casino and have never had any heat or thrown out. If just using chips were cause to get thrown out, I would have been thrown out years ago.

Using chips I can keep the side counts accurately and with no mental effort. I just keep KO in my head and chips for side counts. Not sure why everyone says this is difficult to do because it is not. Tarzan's count is difficult KO or HL with side counts are easy. You are just adding two integers together, AA78mTc + HL, to get a Ten count. Why do you say adding two small integers is difficult?

For Lucky Ladies insurance and hit/stand on hard 12 v 2, 3, 4, 5 6 you just add the counts together to get what I call a psrc = playing strategy running count. Also LL can have player edges of over 20% at times (but lots of variance).

So HL with AA78mTc and 5m9c is the HL version of my KO with AA89mTc and 5m9c and since the HL is the base count there is no need for a Table of Critical Running counts with HL w AA78mTc and 5m9c.

And adding AA78mTc to HL also helps with cover plays which if the casino is tracking you with HL they will think are errors. For example. if AA78mTc is positive enough you would be betting LL, taking insurance and standing on hard 12 v 2 with tc(HL) = 0. Or if AA78mTc were negative enough you would not be taking insurance, hitting not only hard 12 v 2 but maybe even hard 12 v 6 which is a basis strategy stand when tc(HL) = 6 for example and not making the Lucky Ladies bet either. With the LL count you bet LL when tc(HL) >= 6.5 so if the casino looks out for players who bet maximum LL bets only when tc(HL) is larger and are also betting their maximum blackjack bet. A dead give away to be barred from casino right away.

So not only does AA78mTc help the HL with increasing expectation it also increases casino longevity with cover plays that the casino thinks are errors but are actually correct.

Also I taught AA89mTc to use AA89mTc with the KO to my fiend Carla who learned it in less than a week and successfully used it to help with the Lucky Ladies bet. Carla is just average intelligence and I tested her and she kept KO and AA89mTc correctly.. This was a one week learning period for Carla who did not even know how to count before that. And Carla kept both integer counts in her head, KO and AA89mTc, no problem

I think the problem is that counters do not like change (like many other people do not like new ideas) and are resistance to new ideas.

HL w AA78mTc and 5m9c is VERY easy to learn and keep.

Before you make a final judgment on HL w AA78mTc and 5m9c I would ask you to have Gronbog forward the email I sent him with a draft version of HL w AA78mTc and 5m9c for you to review. This book is basically a "how too: book with examples and I have excluded theory so the book is only around 60 pages. Not long at all and an easy read.

Also keeping AA78mTc and 5m9c with the HL is much easier than keeping over 100 HL indices and much stronger.

Furthermore I will make a predication on handicapping HL w AA78mTc and 5m9c by using only the 118 for strategy changes and 5m9c with HL for betting and this handicapped system will beat HO2 w ASC using all lindies.

So the question is which is easier - using WH with 100 indices or using HL w 5m9c and AA78mTc using chips to keep AA78mTc and 45m9c and using just the I18 so only 18 indices to learn.
Thanks.

[Gramazeka]

My friend who does not want to use chips because he said it would draw heat from the casino has been bared from several casinos based on his HL play and betting. I use KO with side counts which has built in cover plays that are correct but look like errors to the casino and have never had any heat or thrown out. If just using chips were cause to get thrown out, I would have been thrown out years ago.

.

The reason for the ban is only Hi Lo and betting ? I do not believe !

[DSchles]

The problem with higher level counts is that once you choose tag values of each count, those tag values have to be used for betting and every playing strategy situation. By using a primary count and side count you can take linear combinations of the counts and get a smorgasbord of counts to choose from and you chose the derived count that maximizes the CC between the EoR and tag value of that derived count and then calculate the index for that derived count using LSL technique.

Gronbog had simulated KO with 5m7c and AA89mTc derived from my technique described above and it left HO2 w ASC in the dust.

I have developed a similar count for the HL which is HL with 5m9c and AA78mTc which using my CC comparisons which have proven to be extremely successful and in line with simulation results, I predict HL w 5m9c and AA78mTc will also smash HO2 w ASC and perform similar to KO w 5m7c and AA89mTc.

So rather than learn dozens of indices for HL or Wong's Halves, you would be better off sticking to I18 and add 5m9c and AA789mTc as side counts to the HL. Of course, you can also add more indices for HL w 5m9c and AA78mTc beyond the I18 but even is you restrict yourself to the I18 which would limit the SCORE of HL w 5m9c and AA78mTc I still think it would beat HO2 w ASC with all indices and now you just have the I18 that needs to be remembered and keep 5m9c and AA78mTc with the HL.

I emailed Gronbog a draft copy of my analysis of HL w 5m9c and AA78mTc which he can make comments on and share with Don or Norm if he wishes.

There isn't a single syllable in the above post that you haven't written VERBATIM (you just keep cutting and pasting the same claptrap) 20 times. Do you have no shame? How many more times will we read the same posts? If you have nothing new to say, can't you give us all a break and simply be quiet?

Of course, if it were my board, ...

Don