Ace Side Count with HiLo or Hi-Opt I

[mikeyd]

I have been using HiLo with about 50 indices and feel that I am now ready to add an ace side count.
I wonder whether it is better to use HiLo with the ASC, or switch to Hi-Opt I with an ASC since the indices are almost the same.
I understand that the PE & IC are higher for Hi Opt I, but that BC correlation is higher for HiLo- .97 vs .88, but I would think the BC for Hi Opt I would be much higher with the ASC.

I would appreciate any advice about which works better with the ASC.
Also does anyone know what is the BC with the ASC.

Please do not suggest a level 2 count since I'm not ready for that now. I play only shoe games since pitch is not available in my area.

 

[tthree]

I would go with hiopt I. It is easier to factor in aces for betting than factor out aces for playing.

 

[AussiePlayer]

Here's a link which rates counts with and without ASC.

http://www.qfit.com/book/ModernBlackjackPage172.htm

 

[Automatic Monkey]

I would go with hiopt I. It is easier to factor in aces for betting than factor out aces for playing.

I agree. HO1 is a useful thing. If you do your sidecount as a secondary count, balancing 2's against aces, the result is exactly High-Low for betting.

 

[blackjack avenger]

ease & return

Wouldn't it be easier to use a higher level count vs a low level count with an A side count?
Probably similar returns.

 

[tthree]

I agree. HO1 is a useful thing. If you do your sidecount as a secondary count, balancing 2's against aces, the result is exactly High-Low for betting.

It always seemed obvious to me that this would be a good idea.

 

[Daggers]

Blackjack avenger, how is an ASC easier with higher level counts? wouldn't it be harder since you have more numbers to add up and deal with? don't get me wrong though, i actually use hi-opt II with ace side count. i just thought it might be easier when adding and subtractions 1's than putting 2's in the equation.

 

[mikeyd]

Thanks all for your comments.
After getting my hands on Las Vegas BJ Diary, I see that alot of the HiOpt I indices are a little different than HiLo.
I have some studying to do.

 

[BJgenius007]

I have been using HiLo with about 50 indices and feel that I am now ready to add an ace side count.
I wonder whether it is better to use HiLo with the ASC, or switch to Hi-Opt I with an ASC since the indices are almost the same.
I understand that the PE & IC are higher for Hi Opt I, but that BC correlation is higher for HiLo- .97 vs .88, but I would think the BC for Hi Opt I would be much higher with the ASC.

I would appreciate any advice about which works better with the ASC.
Also does anyone know what is the BC with the ASC.

Please do not suggest a level 2 count since I'm not ready for that now. I play only shoe games since pitch is not available in my area.

Unfortunately I have to suggest a level 2 counting system since AO2 (Advanced Omega II) is best paired with ASC. And for people originally using Hi Lo, they should use 1/2 DTC (1/2 deck true count).

The desirable aspect of 1/2 DTC for level 2 count system is that the true count is approximately equal to the full deck true count for level 1 counts. So all the indexes you memorize when you learned from Hi Lo stay the same.

You may ask what is 1/2 DTC. You see 8 decks as 16 half-decks. So assuming 3 players and the dealer all got 2 face cards (20) for the first hand

for level 1 counting system Hi Lo:

RC = -2 -2 -2 -2 = -8
TC = -8 / 8 = -1 (Initially there are 8 decks remaining.)

for level 2 counting system AO2:
RC = -4 -4 -4 -4 = -16
TC = -16 / 16 = -1 (Initially there are 16 half-decks remaining.)

You see by using half-decks on AO2, two systems have the same TC.

Now you need to learn to use ASC to adjust TC on bet size. Think 8 deck is a basketball game, for the first quarter, every 7 aces is equivalent one TC point. For the second quarter, every 5 aces is equivalent to one TC point. For the third quarter, every 3 aces is equivalent to one TC point. You won't play the fourth quarter long because penetration won't go that far.

Think 6 decks is a hockey game. For the first period, every 5 aces is equivalent to one TC point. For the second period, every 3 aces is equivalent to one TC point. You won't play the third period long, but for the third period, every 2 aces is equivalent to one TC point. This is where AO2 + ASC shines. For example, we just enter the third period, the deck is ace rich by 8 extra aces, assuming running count is zero

RC = 0
TC = 0

But

Adjusted TC = +4

You place your max bet and you just got a Blackjack!

 

[blackjack avenger]

misunderstood

Blackjack avenger, how is an ASC easier with higher level counts? wouldn't it be harder since you have more numbers to add up and deal with? don't get me wrong though, i actually use hi-opt II with ace side count. i just thought it might be easier when adding and subtractions 1's than putting 2's in the equation.

Which seems harder? It's subjective
Hi lo with A side count (keeping 2 counts)
Or
Halves

Probably similar SCORE results.