counting halves (kind of)

[bubbasparks]

I've been using the wong hi/lo count for some time. Im thinking about incorporating a portion of the wong halves. I'd keep track of the 5's (for now) and add the others as it becomes easier.

Considering the 5's effect the game the most (and are worth 1.5 in wongs halves chart) would this be acceptable?

 

[zengrifter]

I've been using the wong hi/lo count for some time. Im thinking about incorporating a portion of the wong halves. I'd keep track of the 5's (for now) and add the others as it becomes easier.

Considering the 5's effect the game the most (and are worth 1.5 in wongs halves chart) would this be acceptable?

No!!!! zg

 

[bubbasparks]

can you explain why. (maybe in more than 1 word) :/

Also, if that is not an option, what about multiplying by 2? (eg, 2= 1, 3,4,= 2, 5 = 3 ect)

 

[KenSmith]

Doubling the values and playing Wong's "Wholes" is an idea that some find attractive. I never did it that way though. Personally, back when I was learning, I liked the fact that the index numbers were very similar between Hi-Lo and Halves, and you lose that benefit if you have to double everything.

I've always used Halves, and it's a very good count. However, I believe that for the vast majority of players, you're better off keeping the count simple and using Hi-Lo. If you're concerned about the lower win rate, play an extra ten minutes a day.

Why can't you just "add in the fives?" You can't just start counting the fives as +1.5 and leave everything else the same. Well, actually maybe you can!? It becomes an unbalanced count at that point. You'll create more complications than you're avoiding though.