FELT-F vs ZEN comments

[blackcat]

Any comments about switching counts pro or con, or things to consider? spreads, number of indices, etc.
Meow,
Blackcat

[moo321]

There's not going to be much difference. You'd get a much better return on your time by memorizing full indexes than switching between any serious count. Even Hi-Lo vs. a Level II is not as important as the difference between Illustrious 18 and full indexes.

[moo321]

There might be a 10% difference between the counts when comparing back-counting a deeply dealt shoe game (better for RPC/FELT) to spreading 1-4 on double deck (better for Zen).

[DSchles]

Even Hi-Lo vs. a Level II is not as important as the difference between Illustrious 18 and full indexes.

Actually, that's really not true. In a 4.5/6, DAS, S17, play-all, 1-12 game, the SCORE of the I18 captures 95% of the total SCORE available from using all indices. But, from BJA3, page 172, you see that the SCORE of Hi-Opt II for the same game is over 18% higher than that of Hi-Lo.

Obviously, different rules and playing scenarios might change the results, but I think that, in general, your statement is more often false than true.

Don

[DSchles]

Apologies. I compared apples to oranges. The game in BJA3 is for 5/6 and LS, not 4.5/6 and NS. The gain is commensurate with using all the indices compared to using just the I18.

Don

[moo321]

Sorry, I've been running a bunch of sims on variants and said something inaccurate.

The difference between HiLo and a good level II is somewhat significant. The difference between good level II counts (Zen, RPC/Felt, Unbalanced Zen, etc.) is not generally going to be significant. For almost any game, it's a better use of your time to learn more indexes than to switch between level II counts.