Wow, this is great information! I like how you removed different cards and showed how a player has more of an advantage with more aces remaining (than 10s remaining), even with the same count. I also thought it was interesting how this advantage is impacted by the number of decks, with fewer decks showing more of an advantage with an ace rich deck. This is helpful! I'll definitely incorporate this in my betting strategy. I already do this by keeping track of the type of low cards I see in the first two rounds. Even though I use a one level hi lo count, I understand that removing 4, 5 and 6s from the deck is more important to the player than removing 2 and 3s so if I have a plus 2 count but I've seen mostly 4, 5 and 6s, I'll bet more than if I have a plus 2 count and see mostly 2 and 3s. I guess you could say I somewhat use a two level counting system for the first two rounds. Again, I'm only referring to DD. This obviously doesn't apply to shoes.
But I'm still a little confused on how to count the dealer's ace with hi lo for insurance purposes. Please follow me with this hypothetical case (but it has happened to me before). Assume the following: You're using hi lo and you're NOT ASC, and you have a +3 TC and you haven't counted the dealer's ace yet. Is it correct to count the dealer's ace as -1 in this case, which would give you a +2 TC, which then means you wouldn't take insurance (again, based on the hi lo index)? Or should you count the dealer's ace as +1 (for insurance purposes) and take insurance since the TC would be +4. In this case, you'd be side counting this one ace (the dealer's ace) for insurance purposes. I know this situation doesn't come up often, but it's something I've always wondered about. I hope this question made sense.
It is encouraging to see other people use an ASC with hi lo. I've learned a lot from this post. Thanks!