SlyPooch said:
I have 10 against dealer's 10 with TC of +3, the Wizard recommended play is to double (by a pretty wide margin as you can see), but index says I must have count of +4 or higher to do so (I should actually just hit). Look at screenshot and note any thoughts?
Quick disclaimer, indexes change with the number of decks you're using and the rules of the game.
Ok, with that out of the way:
The index for doubling 10 vs 10 is +4 with Hi-lo, according to most sources I'm aware of. It may be +3, but I suspect that's whether or not the indexes were truncated, or floored, or w/e. The same concept of how Wong says to double 8 vs 6 at +1 while Don says to do it at +2. It's because they generated their indexes slightly differently. I believe it's because Wong truncated them. Someone, please correct me if I'm wrong.
Ok, off to the important stuff now:
I believe your index says to double 10 vs 10 at +7 because that's the risk-averse number to do so. You see, it becomes profitable to double 10 vs 10 against a dealer 10 at a true count of +4, but it's a super volatile play, that play in particular, so some people wait until the RA index to do so in order to mitigate risk.
It's my understanding that most index plays are close to the RA number. 10 vs 10 RA index is so much higher for Hi-Lo because that play depends so heavily on the density of Aces in the deck, which Hi-Lo doesn't track.
Someone, please correct me if I'm wrong or chime in with any additional information, thanks.
EDIT: I just realized I misread your post. I answered a question you weren' even asking lol. I thought you accidentally got your hands on the RA index numbers.