Why does hi-lo out perform in double decks?

[snorky]

Hi

I'm running simulations on CVCX on a double deck H17 DAS D9 with 60% penetration. Using a 1-10 spread incorporating -10 to +10 indices, hi-lo very slightly outperforms both hi opt 1 and zen. I don't understand why this is the case. Isn't hi-lo the most inefficient out of these systems? I also tried altering the spread and penetration and hi-lo still outperforms both systems. Is the game just a tad bad due to D9 that makes it irrelevant which system one uses?

 

[snorky]

I just ran another simulation using DA2 and I got similar results. I am very confused right now.

 

[QFIT]

Lots of variables involved. 1-10 spread at DD is pretty high, and HiLo likes big spreads. HiOpt1 does better with more indexes. Zen is much better with the old, original Zen.

 

[tthree]

Did you use an ace side count for HIOPT I? It is important for bet sizing.

 

[creeping panther]

Hi-LO

Get's a bad rap so often:laugh:,,when really it's the :cat:'s meow.

In DD just throw in an ace side, use your head and have fun,,,chances are you will do so well you will be bounced fast, just a real hazard of Hi-LO-LO

CP

 

[21forme]

Get's a bad rap so often:laugh:,,when really it's the :cat:'s meow.

In DD just throw in an ace side, use your head and have fun,,,chances are you will do so well you will be bounced fast, just a real hazard of Hi-LO-LO

CP

Another reference to the never-explained hi lo lo...

 

[moo321]

These system comparisons usually show that there's not enough difference between systems to matter. In some games Hi-Opt 2 is worth it if you're willing to use most of the indices.

Hi-lo is actually very strong for betting correlation, among the best. That means wonging shoes or playing with a big spread, and hi-lo outperforms.

 

[tthree]

Hi

I'm running simulations on CVCX on a double deck H17 DAS D9 with 60% penetration. Using a 1-10 spread incorporating -10 to +10 indices, hi-lo very slightly outperforms both hi opt 1 and zen. I don't understand why this is the case. Isn't hi-lo the most inefficient out of these systems? I also tried altering the spread and penetration and hi-lo still outperforms both systems. Is the game just a tad bad due to D9 that makes it irrelevant which system one uses?

HILO really blows for many soft doubling decisions. I have a list of the hand match ups that tank the PE for HILO. There is 19 soft doubles on the list (26 other hands). D9 means you don't get to make those decisions. The casino might be better off letting you double on any 2 since HILO is so widely used by counters. Your RoR would go way up. If you play with a stretched bankroll they have a good shot at having you lose your session BR.

 

[creeping panther]

3

Soft doubling, another issue altogether.

CP

 

[Daggers]

i would think that hi-opt II with ace side count in a DD game would have the same or even a little bit higher BC. And it has higher PE and IC but if your going to just wong in, i would say stick with the simpler hi-lo since PE isn't as much use then.

 

[tthree]

Effects of count correlation, TC range and frequency of extreme TCs

i would think that hi-opt II with ace side count in a DD game would have the same or even a little bit higher BC. And it has higher PE and IC but if your going to just wong in, i would say stick with the simpler hi-lo since PE isn't as much use then.

I am not sure what you base PE not being important for wonging in. Deck composition is much more important in pitch games. The more accurate your count correlates to the decision the quicker gain accumulates after your index is exceeded. So you play a weakly correlated index with HILO, the gain at the index of +3 is minimal and the gain at TC +6 is still minimal. That is because either the important cards that correlate to the right decision are not included or they are grouped with the cards that have an opposite affect than the key card (key card is counted with the wrong sign). If on the other hand your count is highly correlated to the right decision the gain from index of TC +3 to +6 is significant. Every piece of information that significantly increases this correlation brings larger returns as both TC range and frequency of extreme TC goes up. In shoe games the range and frequency of extreme TC make this effect far less significant due to it having a much smaller range of TCs and the lower frequency of extreme TCs.

 

[Daggers]

i was saying PE isn't as important as BC. PE is still quite important. Out of the two, if you are wonging in, then I would chose hi-lo because the BC is pretty much the same as hi-opt II with ace side count for less work. Of course, its important to have both BC and PE.

 

[tthree]

i was saying PE isn't as important as BC. PE is still quite important. Out of the two, if you are wonging in, then I would chose hi-lo because the BC is pretty much the same as hi-opt II with ace side count for less work. Of course, its important to have both BC and PE.

PE is more important than BC for pitch games. BC is more important than PE for shoe games. If you don't understand what makes PE more important in SD and DD read my last post again carefully and really think about it. You will get TCs unheard of in shoe games. If you put in the effort to have high correlation of count to deck composition all that increased distance between the TC and the index makes a much larger increase in gain for the decision. A weakly correlated matchup can depend so much on the uncounted cards that a large gap in index to TC still has you making the wrong play as to the actual deck composition.

 

[Daggers]

sorry, i missed the DD part. i assumed it was 6D. :laugh: i woke up not long ago and still have my eyes half closed -_-

 

[fwb]

Hi Opt I with no side count won't really outperform HiLo, but zen should in all circumstances. I honestly think no one has posted correct reason yet. I'm pretty sure it's the following, but please tell me if I'm wrong:

Make sure you are looking at all measures of performance. $/hr isn't the most important measure of performance. Side by side with the same spread you might see HiLo make a little more $$ than Zen, but you will notice the RoR of the zen player is notably lower, with lower N0, lower SD, and higher SCORE. Thus, you could slightly increase the spread with zen until reaching the same RoR as HiLo, and see that Zen now profits a little bit more with the same risk.

 

[kewljason]

Get's a bad rap so often:laugh:,,when really it's the :cat:'s meow.

In DD just throw in an ace side, use your head and have fun,,,chances are you will do so well you will be bounced fast, just a real hazard of Hi-LO-LO

CP

These system comparisons usually show that there's not enough difference between systems to matter. In some games Hi-Opt 2 is worth it if you're willing to use most of the indices.

Hi-lo is actually very strong for betting correlation, among the best. That means wonging shoes or playing with a big spread, and hi-lo outperforms.

Maybe we should have an extensive discussion about system comparisons.....oh wait.....:laugh:

Neither CP, nor moo, weighed in on the recent discussion, but clearly two experienced guys that know what they are doing and talking about.

 

[tthree]

Counts and 6 deck performance

Here are sim results based on play all and wonging for the purpose of system comparisons. You all hate anecdotal evidence so here is the real deal.

PLAY ALL:
There are 16 different ranks for play all. I will list the ones I hear mentioned most on the forum and the top ranks.
6 deck, 75% pen, 1 to 16 spread($5 to $80), S17, DAS, DOA, no RSA, no late surrender.
......................................SCORE.................
COUNT/SYSTEM..N0(rank) WIN/100 ..STD DEV
HIOPT II(A-side) 32762(1) $30.52(1) $552.48
Brh-I/Brh-II(tru) 32952(2) $30.35(2) $550.88
AO-II/Halves..... 33088(3) $30.22(3) $549.75
HIOPT II........... 33397(4) $29.94(4) $547.20
Zen................ 35526(10) $28.15(11) $530.55
Halves(x2)...... 35632(11) $28.06(11) $529.76
TKO(true)....... 37939(12) $26.36(12) $513.40
High low......... 40095(15) $24.94(15) $499.41
KO(run).......... 40561(16) $24.65(16) $496.53


BACK COUNTING:
There are 22 different ranks for back counting since it spreads out the counts to have fewer shared ranks. Enter at equivalent of HILO TC +1. Spread 1 to 8. Plays about 27% of the time. Same rules as play all above.

.....................................SCORE..............................
COUNT SYSTEM .N0(Rank) WIN/100 .STD DEV. % played
HIOPT II(A side) 20524(1) $48.72(1) $698.02 24.83%
AO II/Halves..... 20667(2) $48.39(2) $695.60 27.41%
Brh I/Brh II(tru) 20706(3) $48.29(3) $694.94 27.29%
HIOPT II.......... 20945(5) $47.74(5) $690.97 26.25%
Halves(x2)....... 21763(9) $45.95(9) $677.86 27.41%
Zen.............. 21815(11) $45.84(11) $677.05 24.88%
TKO(true)..... 22786(16) $43.89(15) $662.48 27.32%
High low....... 23842(21) $41.94(21) $647.63 26.66%
KO(run)........ 24465(22) $40.88(22) $639.34 26.02%

HILO has it's strengths. It's easy enough for everyone to do. May make multiple tactics easier. And all the other practical arguments may have some validity depending upon your strengths and weaknesses. But I get tired of hearing the lies about it outperforming anything. Running count KO is the only thing it outperforms.

 

[psyduck]

Maybe we should have an extensive discussion about system comparisons.....oh wait.....:laugh:

Neither CP, nor moo, weighed in on the recent discussion, but clearly two experienced guys that know what they are doing and talking about.

It is pointless to argue which system is the best. It all depends on the game you play and how you play. Have you researched how much you can gain using a sidecount in a SD game? BTW, it is not hard at all to have a sidecount in SD.

 

[kewljason]

Have you researched how much you can gain using a sidecount in a SD game? BTW, it is not hard at all to have a sidecount in SD.

No I haven't. I also have not played a single hand of SD game in 4 years, so no need to research that. I do side count in DD games though. That's pretty easy as well. :laugh: I didn't start out sidecounting, but in a DD game with only 8 aces, it is almost hard not to notice when they are played. Sort of unintentional side counting.

 

[snorky]

Yeah I did not take a look at the ROR. Zen by far outperforms hi-lo in every category. On the other hand, hi opt 1 is sh!t... Thanks for clarifying everyone!