I find it is better to stagger your bets up to a 1.5% advantage for the maximum bet at tables where the betting limits are not high, so as to avoid playing more than 2 squares. The swings are greater, but we have no choice. 3 and 4 squares is a bit tell that exposes card counters.

I am just glad though as my bankroll increases I can forget about those lower limit tables that served their purposes for a time.

Do you prefer lower betting, lower standard deviation, high EV games, or lower EV, higher standard deviation but bigger betting games? The more I am confronted with this choice, the more I am willing to take on higher SD, lower EV games to be able to throw more money around. The danger of course is if they do short you, it has a great impact.

The problem is these great games with high EV don't let you bet much money at them, so being barred from them is of no consequence. I made the most money at games with low EV where I could play lots of hours. Hours became more important than high EV.

Recently I played at a table where for several hours a face card was sitting on the floor, when I pit boss finally discovered it. They had to count all the cards because they were not sure if it came from that shoe.

The only time I can use SBA Calc. 4.0 effectively for kelly is when there is really high limits and the game is not that good. Because I play the best games in the world always, kelly can't be used effectively to lower SD and increase logorithmic growth of the bankroll. That's the trade off.