Absolute Best Counting Method for Double Deck?

I have been using Red Sevens for a Double Deck game with Lucky Ladies side bet with some good success. With pivot point of +4, and +6 on the LL. After being thrown out of several casinos, I realized there might actually be some good money in this with the proper bankroll.

Anyway I'm just trying to improve my game at this point as I think I am ready for a more advanced system. Any suggestions, and links, along with indices would be appreciated.

Thanks

You'll probably get a lot of different answers with this because of different people's opinions on SC's and their accuracy, but I believe the general consensus is that it's between Hi Opt II and Advanced Omega II with the ace side counts.

Ao2, and ho2 are virtually tied in WinRate. But Ho2, has a slightly higher score, lower RoR, and a little easier to use.

How much of an increase are we talking from Red Seven? Is it worth it to learn a new strategy?

Any links?

I would think if you're going to be playing DD it would be very beneficial, but for shoe games you'd probably be okay sticking to Red Seven, but that's just my opinion. I'm sure someone has a link to some sims that can show you the difference.

http://www.blackjackincolor.com/penetration6.htm

http://www.blackjackincolor.com/penetration7.htm

While not specifically Red Seven and Hi Opt II, this should give you an idea

Just out of curiosity, how do the two compare on a DD game if neither use the Ace side count? And how do they compare to Zen if they don't use it?

Use the UBZII bjinfo open source count. Saves learning to do deck estimation, pivot is the same, no side counts. Just learn the new tags and the single set of double deck index numbers. Should add about 0.2 to your return from the improved playing efficiency. Work smarter, not harder. Read the sticky in this forum.
BW

Thats, a question, that only cvdata, can answer.

w/o the ace, sidecount, zen would definetly take the crown.

Ho2, is a blast of a count, to use. I say yes, if your gonna play DD. However, i say no, b/c it actually took me a couple years of relentless paractice, to master these counts. By the time i was done, i looked i had been ran over by a bus. And felt like it too. Im still mentally wore out, to this day. It's one, of the resons, i dont participate, in alot of the math discussion on here.

Is hi-lo considered acceptable for DD or should it be kept to shoe games?

well, if you had to choose between hi lo, and playing like a ploppy or worse, . then yes hi lo is considered "acceptable." but switching to an ace neutral count for DD will work wonders for your bankroll and your stress level. Go with hi opt 1, then if you get serious, hi opt 2.

There is NO consensus on that. Both are obsolete strategies, without a secondary count overlay,
like 2,5 +1 vs A-2. Ace-density 1/4D estimates, as recommended by the authors, won't cut the mustard.
That approach will only yield the same real-world result as

WAB's option is to stick with R7 but count all 7s +0.5 and recalibrate for true-count,
thus evolving R7 to a TC'd level-2 scheme, which will out perform HiLo and is on par with RPC,
ZEN, and Mentor. zg

Very bad advice - in general Ace-neutral counts are OBSOLETE. zg

okee dokee. :laugh: HO2 is obsolete. Are you going to push Zen count instead? Hybrid ace reckoning is good too, but Ace neutral is not bad advice.

That is also known as BRH-0.

Once you get up to level 2 or 3 all the counts are almost equally good. UBZ is fine, so is Mentor, RPC, Zen etc. I'm using Unbalanced Zen Halves myself (Mentor, but with the 5 raised to +3 for an unbalanced count) because the tags are perfect for aggressive spreading on 6:5 games as well as being just fine for any other kind of pitch game, even without true counting.

I generated my own indexes for the 6 deck shoe game I play. I have not found a level-2 system that can beat HiLo in terms of combined effect from PE and IC.

That's why I mentioned the part about people's feelings on the ace side count. I suppose it depends on how skilled the individual person was with it. Running some sims this morning shows that even without the ace side count hi opt II and advanced omega II performed at a level slightly lower then zen (at least up to this point, they haven't quite finished yet.). I'm wondering if the side count was kept, but RC only adjusted for gross misproportions of aces left if that would close the gap a bit more.

Also the side count you mentioned above why is the 5 only +1 for the SC? Do you do the 5 and the 2 so you have two separate cards to weigh the ace against to protect from situations where 5's are clumped together?

I dont think so

Really?

Then something must not be right with your sims, because any level 2 system will beat High-Low in those parameters, even if only slightly.

Most probably you were not using optimal betting spread for each count but rather the same one you use for hi-lo.