Quote Originally Posted by UncleChoo View Post
I'm really trying to understand this statement. My understanding is that insurance is probably the easiest of all actions to understand. Very very simple at its core. If (X's remaining > 1/3 of the deck) insuring is profitable.
How is it even vaguely possible the comment above rings true?
UncleChoo,

Here's an example of how a negative TC can still be +EV to insure. Say you're playing heads up with the dealer on a single deck game from the 1950's, when they dealt all the way to the bottom. On round 9 of the deck the dealer is showing an Ace, and after you look at your cards you realize the only five cards you have not yet seen (these five are the burn card from the beginning of the deck, the dealer's hole card, and the three remaining cards in the deck) are 10, 10, 5, 5, 6. Here, the unseen cards are 40% 10's, so insurance is +EV (in fact +20%) but the HiLo running count is -1 and the TC is -1/(5/52) = -10.4.

Hope this helps!

Dog Hand