Originally Posted by
seriousplayer
Regardless your system is inferior to the Hi-OPT II ASC because you need to add four components to get even close to the performance of Hi-OPT II with ASC. What would happen if Hi-OPT II ASC also side counts 7s, 8s and 9s? Then it will outperform your system. I could add two more components to Hi-OPT II ASC to make it four and guarantee that it would outperform your count. I would give you more respect if your count system is two components comparing to Hi-OPT II ASC which is also two components. You don't want to admit that you are wrong when you are in fact wrong and make further corrections and adjustment to your system. I don't care about all the spreadsheets and calculations you did.
See I already mention that "camouflage" doesn't apply to your system because you are backcounting and that defeats the purpose of camouflage.
The only "correction" I made was that I did not include negative indices because I back count. I have now included negative indices so that now my system will beat the HO2 w ASC for the play all game also. And camoflague plays are sitll good even if you back count. Yes, the casino may figure you are a counter if they see you back counting but they will see you making what they consider crazy and incorrect plays and figure you are a poor counter who cannot win.
Also there are not four compenents - there is the pimracy KO with two side counts AA89mTc and 5m7c so that is a total of three counts. But all of htese counts are level one with the exception of AA89mTc which is techniaclly a level 2 but as easy as a level one to calcuilates since htere is only one rank, the Ace, counted as + 2 where athe HO2 has two ranks at +2, four ranks (the Tens) as -2 and four ranks as +1 which all must be counted at the same time. That is a difficult level 2 count and you keep on insisting that HO2 w ASC is easier to use you are saying level 2 counts are easier to keep than level 1 counts. You know what does not make any sense.
And I did see a Youtube video (which I cannot find now) how someone was using chips to keep track of Aces with the HO2. What they did was count Aces played as A, B, C, D and when you got past D, you put one chip to the side which corresponds to four Aces or one full deck of Aces and start over with A, B, C, D again and put another chip when you get to D and start at A again. I think this is a neat way to keep an Ace side count but I still like my plus/minus counts better since they are easier and 100% accurate since plus/minus counts do not involve estimating decks played whereas the calculation of Adef sill involves estimating decks played.
But enough for now. Please hold off on any more comments on my system until the simulations are done.
Also I gave Gronbog the negative indices and the LS indices yesterday just so he has them when he is ready! I did not mean to imply I want Gronbog to drop everything and do his simulations immediately. Gronbog has been extremely generous in doing the simulations and I am sure everyone on this site appreciated his efforts.
Bookmarks