Table composition, cohabitating with counting?

[EasyRhino]

Table composition: You know, the idea of modifying play strategy on close calls depending on what's visible on the table. Here's the Fred Renzey article where I first saw it mentioned:

http://renzey.casinocitytimes.com/articles/1052.html

I've also heard it referred to as the rule of "45" when dealing with player 16s. There was a also an old lengthy exchange at blackjackforumonline, where they came up with the idea that a multihand16 should be stood on, unless there were more 6s than 5s on the table.

I kind of like doing a table composition play for 16v10. It's just more fun. However, I get the impression that Mr. Renzey wrote the article for a BS player, or at most, someone using his Ace/10 count.

Personally, I'm using the KO count. Theoretically, I already know the balance of small and large cards left based off of the entire shoe, not just what's on the table.

Are any table-composition plays still valid, or should they be ignored in favor of strategy indices based on count?

[Automatic Monkey]

Originally Posted by EasyRhino

...
Are any table-composition plays still valid, or should they be ignored in favor of strategy indices based on count?

No, all table composition is, is counting with forgetting the count at the beginning of the hand. Why would you want to do that?