sprettster
Member
Where can I find a compilation of bet vs. TC schedules for various games using AOII?
Thanks,
sprettster
Thanks,
sprettster
Omega II betting schedules?
- Thread starter sprettster
- Start date
I use AOII also- I don't know where you can the betting schedules- what I do is simply play an extra unit for each positive TC. When wonging, I wait for a +7 or +8 count and flat bet until the count goes down, at which time I make downward adjustments. Very simplified I know, but I think it's better than the betting system Carlson proposes.
ElementX
ElementX
zengrifter
Banned
ElemX's betting is quite workable - but bets cannot be carefully crafted w/o taking into account the BR size - assuming reasonable sufficient BR, each
TC+1 = +0.25 so bet accordingly (after subtracting the housEdge). zg
TC+1 = +0.25 so bet accordingly (after subtracting the housEdge). zg
sprettster
Member
Thanks for the input. For 1 and 2D that's pretty much what I'm doing now. For 6 deck, which I really haven't played much of, wouldn't that lead to overbetting your advantage early in the shoe? Specifically, with how many decks remaining would a TC of 1 warrant an increase to 2 units? I realize that AOII isn't the easiest count for 6D, but it's the one I know...
sprettster
sprettster
Some good points sprettster. There may be some overbetting with the AOII count early in 6D shoes, which is why I like to enter shoes with about 2.5 decks left. Never believed in playing negative shoes. Try this in 6 decks: Say there are three decks left and the TC is +6. Then use this +6 as your pivot point for flat betting, increasing and decreasing as the TC varies from this pivot. Did that make any sense?! By the way, what are your thoughts on the AOII's treatment of the aces?
ElementX
ElementX
sprettster
Member
I'm not sure I follow you on that, but it sounds interesting. By this system, what TC at 2 decks gives a 2 unit bet? At four decks?
Regarding AOII and aces, I've had no trouble keeping and using an ace side count for 1 and 2D, but the 6D situation is a bit harder. I keep reading here about how 2-level counts in general are obsolete, with special abuse offered to AOII for the ace thing, but I think that as long as you can handle the extra difficulty without wearing yourself out then you aren't harming your game. But with good 1 and 2D games getting harder to find, if effective 6D play requires a different system then I'll make the change.
Regarding AOII and aces, I've had no trouble keeping and using an ace side count for 1 and 2D, but the 6D situation is a bit harder. I keep reading here about how 2-level counts in general are obsolete, with special abuse offered to AOII for the ace thing, but I think that as long as you can handle the extra difficulty without wearing yourself out then you aren't harming your game. But with good 1 and 2D games getting harder to find, if effective 6D play requires a different system then I'll make the change.
sprettster
Member
Thanks ElementX.
>> The assumption that it "won't harm your game" seems a week justification.
Agreed. My reluctance to change is just based on my investment in the AOII. I know all the strategy tables at TC +/- 24, and that took a lot of work. I don't relish the prospect of working to get that proficient with a different system.
>> The assumption that it "won't harm your game" seems a week justification.
Agreed. My reluctance to change is just based on my investment in the AOII. I know all the strategy tables at TC +/- 24, and that took a lot of work. I don't relish the prospect of working to get that proficient with a different system.
Mysuggestion is to cange to Zen and use the same tables as for the Omega.
Many pros group the indices into blocks thereby rounding as necessary.
The accuracy factor does not seem critical if you are "off by one" on occasion.
I find the Zen easier to use as less mental arithmatic is involved and consequently can play for much longer without error than when using the Omega.
I do not believe that an ace neutral count is justified for shoe games.
Just my 0.2!
BTW the switch took less than 20 minutes to master using the same 50 or so indices.
Many pros group the indices into blocks thereby rounding as necessary.
The accuracy factor does not seem critical if you are "off by one" on occasion.
I find the Zen easier to use as less mental arithmatic is involved and consequently can play for much longer without error than when using the Omega.
I do not believe that an ace neutral count is justified for shoe games.
Just my 0.2!
BTW the switch took less than 20 minutes to master using the same 50 or so indices.
zengrifter
Banned
Re: Omega II betting schedules? YES
Omega indices will work fine for ZEN - just swap your Ace-9 tags and you are in business. zg
Omega indices will work fine for ZEN - just swap your Ace-9 tags and you are in business. zg
Re: Omega II betting schedules? YES
Ace neutral counts such as Omega and HI-opt II do generally score higher.
However that listed score is attained by simulation only and assumes 100% accuracy. Anybody thatmakes even non frequent mistakes might as well stick with HI-Lo. The new version of CVBJ is superb and has numerous tests and drills.
Not a plug just my very humble opinion.
Ace neutral counts such as Omega and HI-opt II do generally score higher.
However that listed score is attained by simulation only and assumes 100% accuracy. Anybody thatmakes even non frequent mistakes might as well stick with HI-Lo. The new version of CVBJ is superb and has numerous tests and drills.
Not a plug just my very humble opinion.