What did you start with?

[hirschy75]

What was the first card couting technique you learned and what did you switch to?

 

[hirschy75]

I am just asking because I am just learning and everyone here seems like they know a whole different language. Just tryin to get a feel for this exciting new game.

 

[sagefr0g]

hi/lo, switched to ace/ten front count, switched back to hi/lo, switched to a blend of hi/lo & voodoo.
i'm a gambler not a professional advantage player.

 

[Sonny]

My first system has Hi-Opt I, then Hi-Opt II. After a while I switched to Zen because it doesn't require a side count of aces. More recently I've been using HiLo but I still like Zen better. I think most people usually start with either HiLo or KO. Both system s are very simple and quite powerful.

-Sonny-

 

[Canceler]

I started with KO, and never have found a reason to switch.

 

[kewljason]

I started with Hi-lo, then switched to RPC a year ago. wanted the axtra advantage of a level 2 system.

 

[zengrifter]

My first system has Hi-Opt I, then Hi-Opt II. After a while I switched to Zen because it doesn't require a side count of aces. More recently I've been using HiLo but I still like Zen better. I think most people usually start with either HiLo or KO. Both system s are very simple and quite powerful.

Tell us why you are using HiLo of late. zg

 

[zengrifter]

See ZGI page 4. zg

 

[callipygian]

Started with Hi-Lo and never switched.

The thing I like best about Hi-Lo is the incredible versatility. Wonging in, Wonging out, bet spreading, strategy changes, and shuffle tracking are all available to Hi-Lo counters with no additional steps or side counts required. There are better systems for all of the individual applications, but no one other system does a better job at all five.

The drawback is that Hi-Lo is a little more complex to learn starting off than KO or Red 7; you're most likely to make deck estimation errors which will cost you until you get that down pat.

 

[EyeHeartHalves]

I used

Hi-Lo for a couple weeks and then switched to Wong's "Halves" a couple years ago and never looked back. In the World of Blackjack, the most profitable theories are also the most difficult learn. Screw "happy mediums"--SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!

 

[callipygian]

In the World of Blackjack, the most profitable theories are also the most difficult learn. Screw "happy mediums"--SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!

Can't argue with that.

Can you estimate how much time it took you to learn Halves in relation to how long it took you to learn Hi-Lo? I think it would be helpful for those of us who are casual players (<50 hrs/yr) decide whether it's worth the effort.

 

[InPlay]

hi/lo, switched to ace/ten front count, switched back to hi/lo, switched to a blend of hi/lo & voodoo.
i'm a gambler not a professional advantage player.

At least we have something in common "i'm a gambler," I like that!

 

[rukus]

Can't argue with that.

Can you estimate how much time it took you to learn Halves in relation to how long it took you to learn Hi-Lo? I think it would be helpful for those of us who are casual players (<50 hrs/yr) decide whether it's worth the effort.

50 hours a year is not enough (in my opinion and, though i havent checked the math to confirm, i am sure statistically speaking as well) to let the extra edge halves or any other higher level system gives you to shine through the variance of this game. i would stick with hi lo unless you want to do it for the personal challenge. BUT if learning a higher level system vs something like hi lo keeps you out of the casino (ie delays you from playing at an advantage), i would recommend sticking with hi lo. i think the posts here from long time APs like sonny who mention years later going back to something as "simple" as hi lo from hi opt I/II or zen is a testament to the simple truth that whatever system will get you playing in the casino the fastest and easiest with an advantage is the one to use.

 

[SD Padres]

Started with Hi-Lo and used that for a few years. Switched to Wong Halves and used that for quite sometime as well. About 3 years ago I switched again to KO and don't feel that I've given up that much do to it's simplicity. I would rather use a simpler system accurately than use a complicated system and make 1 or 2 mistakes per hour.

 

[blackjack avenger]

Fear and Loathing Outside of Las Vegas

It started with fear and loathing of a 9 to 5 job.
Then Hi Low
Then Halves

 

[Brock Windsor]

Started with KO. Then modified it to TKO to improve accuracy at the beginning and end of the shoes.

 

[EyeHeartHalves]

To callipgian & others,

Can't argue with that.

Can you estimate how much time it took you to learn Halves in relation to how long it took you to learn Hi-Lo? I think it would be helpful for those of us who are casual players (<50 hrs/yr) decide whether it's worth the effort.

It took me literally a few days to learn Hi-Lo accurately. Admittedly, it took me a few months to learn Halves accurately but I went the extra mile to learn more than the Sweet 16 or Illustrious 18 that I did with Hi-Lo. I already knew BS to the 't' before even attempting Hi-Lo. Thus, Hi-Lo was pretty easy and admittedly, I thought Halves was going to be a lot easier than it was.

I'm not recommending this for everyone but here's what I did...

I tried to learn RAPC but couldn't even find proper BS deviations. This was after learning Hi-Lo. (It's part of my personality to do things the hard way.) I was trying to start with "the top" and work my way down. I then tried UAPC but after a while, I had to admit to myself that I just couldn't handle a "multi-parameter" counting system. Then I tried Halves and was so intrigued by the fact that I was only off by a couple RCs after my first fast-paced 8d shoe, I never went to a lesser system. A couple years later, I can brag that if I was a stock, I'd be rated "out-perform" but I'll admit, those first few months of training were brutal.