Frogman: Value of hybrid system

[Frogman]

I would appreciate any help with this decision-whether or not to change my counting system.
When I started counting about 15 years ago, I inadvertently used Wong's High-Low Count with Humble's Hi-Opt 1 indices for 4 decks. I discovered this about 5 years later, but was winning and comfortable with this hybrid.

Soon I expect to have more personal time to learn a new system, but would like to know if it is worthwhile continuing this "system". How does it compare with High-Low, UBZ2, Omega2 and any other system felt to be relevant?

I play in Vegas; 2D,S17,DAS (will play H17 or NDAS if first choice not available); 60-70% pen; spread 1-5, 16-20 hours/trip.

So, have I stumbled onto something worthwhile or merely stumbled?

Thanks

[Don Schlesinger]

> Soon I expect to have more personal time to
> learn a new system, but would like to know
> if it is worthwhile continuing this
> "system".

What does "worthwhile" mean? You're using the wrong indices. Obviously, using the proper ones would add value, no?

> How does it compare with
> High-Low,

Worse, of course!

> UBZ2, Omega2 and any other system
> felt to be relevant?

Uniformly worse. How could it possibly be otherwise?

> I play in Vegas; 2D,S17,DAS (will play H17
> or NDAS if first choice not available);
> 60-70% pen; spread 1-5, 16-20 hours/trip.

> So, have I stumbled onto something
> worthwhile or merely stumbled?

Stumbled. I'm a bit puzzled by your question. You're using the wrong indices for a system. What could be good about that?

Don

[Frogman]

> What does "worthwhile" mean?
> You're using the wrong indices. Obviously,
> using the proper ones would add value, no?

> Worse, of course!

> Uniformly worse. How could it possibly be
> otherwise?

> Stumbled. I'm a bit puzzled by your
> question. You're using the wrong indices for
> a system. What could be good about that?

> Don
You have answered my question.
Thank you,
Frogman