Keeping an ACE count. Worthwhile or waste of effort?

[newb99]

Soliciting views. All comments appreciated.

For info:
6 deck shoe
75% pen
ENHC rules (dealer BJ wins all bets)

Many thanks.

[zengrifter]

Waste. zg

[newb99]

Ta.

[newb99]

Thinking about it, why do people do it then ?

[jack,jackson]

Originally Posted by newb99

Thinking about it, why do people do it then ?

Using an Ace-Reckoned hurts your PE a little bit, since its negative card for betting, but a slighty positive card over-all for playing. Thats why the Zen count tags it as -1.

[FLASH1296]

For shoe games I play ZEN.
That is an Ace-Reckoned Count.

For DD games I use Hi-Opt II.
With side-counted Aces, natch.

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by FLASH1296

For DD games I use Hi-Opt II.
With side-counted Aces, natch.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

Waste. zg

[Warlord]

Originally Posted by FLASH1296

For shoe games I play ZEN.
That is an Ace-Reckoned Count.

For DD games I use Hi-Opt II.
With side-counted Aces, natch.

I would concentrate on using only zen. mho

[FLASH1296]

The fantastically high Playing Efficiency of .67 coupled with a very high (Ace-Adjusted) Betting Correlation makes Hi-Opt II the "gold-standard" of 'pitch games'

I use ZEN for shoe games as Side-Counting Aces in a shoe game is rarely of much value, and the slightly diminished playing efficiency is also unimportant in shoe games; as in those games sync'ing our betting ramp to the betting correlation is our primary tactic for 'getting the money'.

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by FLASH1296

[FONT="Century Gothic"][SIZE="4"][COLOR="DarkRed"]The fantastically high Playing Efficiency of .67 coupled with a very high (Ace-Adjusted) Betting Correlation makes Hi-Opt II the "gold-standard" of 'pitch games'

It depends on HOW you side-count the Aces - if you side-count them and adjust the way authors Humble, Uston, Revere, and Carlson recommend in their books you are working harder to only get the same gain as ZEN. Not worth it. WASTED effort. zg

Ps - So how do YOU count YOUR Aces?