Systems under scutiny

Using CVBJ set up for Hi-Lo but using my UAPC system I am encountering enormous discrepancies between the two on the count and proper index play. I found one 6d shoe halfway through I was at near TC+6 UAPC but less than 3 Hi-Lo I. Just now I find myself at TC+1 UAPC but +4 Hi-Lo.

Aside from the betting issue which is huge I am finding some things are just not lining up together on the index moves as a result.

I was going to maybe take up or down a UAPC index move to kind of average it against what Hi Lo would do but there is a more serious math problem going on.

Any help would be appreciated. I do know UAPC uses .5 deck count adjustment vs. Hi-Lo.s full.

what is UAPC ??

Uston Advanced Point Count.

http://www.qfit.com/card-counting.htm

Probably because the TC for playing decisions does not include the ace side count.

-Sonny-

Another reason

Another reason is UAPC counts 8 as 1 and 9 as -1 whereas with Hi Lo they are both 0 so for the same Hi Lo count at mid shoe it you had 10 8s play vs. 10 9s playing your count count swing under UAPC by 20 running points for the same Hi Lo Count.

If I had the know how I would run through CVBJ using my count while set for Hi Lo find the problems then run them on a sim or something and see which system is right.

Both systems are "right" but they are using different information to make their decisions. Some decisions are more accurate with an ace-neutral count and others aren't. The UAPC system is probably more accurate overall but I don't think the difference will add up to much in terms of profit.

-Sonny-

Dopple, maybe i'm offbase here, but lemme just say, in case you don't know, i'm pretty sure you can adjust CVBJ for the particular count that you use, in other words i don't think it has to be set to just hi/lo.
edit: erhh QFIT or someone please correct me if i'm wrong :whip:

Sonny and Sage thanks for the responses. Yes you can set CVBJ to any system you want and even try tweeking indices if you like. I put UAPC on mine but for study run Hi Lo to see what the differences are.

At my level of play this is not something I need to worry about right now.

I do find it interesting and thanks again for getting back.

Thanks Flash I know about the differences in levels and will just assume bet sizing is about the same.

If I had time I was going to work on a spreadsheet to take the values from each system and see if for example you had 3 players using different systems how their plays and bets would vary.

Since the efficiency numbers on the strategy summary provided by Sonny indicate they are about the same I would guess over the long run you would not see more than maybe a 10 percent difference in a 2 or 3 level system vs. a level one system but that is just a hypothesis. I would almost like to be running Hi-Lo in the backround as I count but my brain-disk-space is not that large.

There must be some cases where one system is dead off and the other is right.