Email: [email protected]
Really!!!! Your Wong Halves can't even beat UBZII using only the running count in double deck games without incorporating ace side count to Wong Halves. So, why don't you be quiet.
Your Wong Halves is not shit without an ace side count. All I have to do is go in CVDATA generate 100+ risk adverse indices using UBZII in running count. Playing a double deck game. I am willing to bet UBZII in running count will beat Wong Halves with true count.
Last edited by seriousplayer; 02-11-2021 at 01:29 PM.
1. You’ve totally missed the point - not unusual on this site
2. Learns to absorb and then decipher information
3. Don’t know UBZ2, so don’t give a shit
4. Try FBM ASC Advanced - WH on steroids
5. Reread point 2, then maybe, you’ll get point 1
6. Think I’ll go back into hibernation
Try Wong Halves without FBM ASC Advance:
Your Wong Halves is no shit without an ace side count. All I have to do is go in CVDATA generate 100+ risk adverse indices using UBZII in running count. Playing a double deck game. I am willing to bet UBZII in running count will beat Wong Halves with true count.
My point is that if Wong Halves is so strong why would a level 2 count beat it in double deck game and a side count is needed to improve the performance? Wong Halve should beat UBZII in all conditions without adding another parameter. In my opinion, if someone needs to add a side count to another count to beat the other means to me that count is inferior.
I’ll come out of self imposed hibernation one more time to explain to Junior the flaws in his minor league argument.
He states and implies - only UBZ2 100 RA indices are required to beat Halves at double deck. Congratulations. My main game is 6 deck which I’m sure all are aware is far more dependent on Betting Correlation. Further, add on FBM Basic, really nothing more than an ASC, which is not required to surpass UBZ 2 at 6 deck, and the tide turns at DD.
Now, add on the fearsome power of FBM ASC Advanced and you have a fearsome counting weapon for any game. Some time back, I laid the gauntlet down about determining the underlying theory behind FBM ASC Advanced. No one has yet taken up the challenge.
Yes, because full Wong Halves consist of 100+ indices. So it is an apple to apple comparison. Secondly, for an unbalanced count like UBZII it doesn't have 100+ in six or eight deck games. It will have less indices. I selected every indices in CVDATA to try to generate the indices using UBZII in a six deck and it only came up with more than 60+. In an eight deck game the indices are even less.
In the same sense I can add a secondary count to match your FBM ASC Advanced Wong Halves.
Last edited by seriousplayer; 02-11-2021 at 06:20 PM.
I’m really trying to hibernate, however, your inquiry requires explanation. I was referring to bullshit versus horse shit. To save another post, I must confess that I’m pissed at Norm. I was drinking hot tea when I clicked on the ballchinian link - said tea scalding my nostrils.
Bookmarks