Alternative of converting to true count?

[GoodEye]

Considering Hi-Lo, we know that the running count has a different meaning depending on the decks left because it has to be converted to a true count. A running count of 10 for 5 decks left (true count +2) doesn't have the same impact as a running count of 10 for 2 decks left (true count +5).

Well, instead of dividing, why not just acknowledge which running count should be considered into raising bets depending on how many decks are left? For example...and this is just to explain myself....

Lets say you will raise your bets at true count +3.
Then that means you should only worry about when the running count hits 15 with 5 decks left, 12 when there are 4 decks, 9 when there are 3 decks, and 6 when there are 2 decks. This seems like it could be easily engrained into the mind with a little practice instead of working out division in your head as you play.

I assume some people probably do this. I just haven't run across this in the forums so I wanted to bring it up. I might be totally missing something here because I'm still learning.

Feedback would be appreciated

 

[Goma]

You can do this if you want but your win rate will be affected because you ignored the other indices which is part of your winning strategy. This strategy in my opinion is best for Wongers.

For example at a running count of -5 with 5 decks left which translates to TC = -1: you were dealt with
K & 3 for a total of 13 and the dealer's upcard is 2 Wong's index says [Hit < -1]
if you don't know this then you might stand when you are suppose to hit and so on..............

But there is another counting system which is effective as Hi-Lo and this is REKO compliment by QFIT you can take a look at this. The truth is, Hi-lo in my opinion is best suited for shuffle trackers rather than card counters. But if you only want to count cards REKO is the best. I never used REKO but I'm going to switch to REKO from Hi-lo.

 

[kewljason]

The truth is, Hi-lo in my opinion is best suited for shuffle trackers rather than card counters. But if you only want to count cards REKO is the best. I never used REKO but I'm going to switch to REKO from Hi-lo.

Hi-lo is just fine for card counting! Reko certainly is NOT the best. It is a simplified version of KO. KO, REKO and hi-lo are all level one systems and very similar in strength, but there are many stronger multi-level systems.

In comparing Reko and Hi-lo, you will find the results very very similar, almost identical for most games. REKO has a slightly better betting efficiency, but the playing strategy will be slightly less effective because of compromised departure points.

The appeal of REKO is it's simplicity. If you have already learned and mastered hi-lo, switching to REKO is a waste.

 

[FLASH1296]

Best for beginners

If a novice or casual recreational BJ player wishes to avoid True Count
calculations the alternative is to use an UNBALANCED Level One Count.

I strongly suggest getting a copy of "Blackbelt in Blackjack" by Arnold Snyder.

The book contains several good choices, including "Hi-Lo Lite" and "The Red Seven" counts.

There's considerable sound advice and even the "ZEN COUNT" if you want a powerful count.

 

[sagefr0g]

Considering Hi-Lo, we know that the running count has a different meaning depending on the decks left because it has to be converted to a true count. A running count of 10 for 5 decks left (true count +2) doesn't have the same impact as a running count of 10 for 2 decks left (true count +5).

Well, instead of dividing, why not just acknowledge which running count should be considered into raising bets depending on how many decks are left? For example...and this is just to explain myself....

Lets say you will raise your bets at true count +3.
Then that means you should only worry about when the running count hits 15 with 5 decks left, 12 when there are 4 decks, 9 when there are 3 decks, and 6 when there are 2 decks. This seems like it could be easily engrained into the mind with a little practice instead of working out division in your head as you play.

I assume some people probably do this. I just haven't run across this in the forums so I wanted to bring it up. I might be totally missing something here because I'm still learning.

Feedback would be appreciated

that's a good way to do it GoodEye. of course as you allude your example is for tc=+3.
but i think you realize as well you could use your methods for other tc's as well.
i've done it that way for lower tc's, that way saving myself having to bother figuring true counts until some 'trigger' running count has been reached at some pack depth. then after that if you don't have enough memorized numbers you can just switch to using the tc = rc/#decks remaining method.
saves a few brain cells, imho.

 

[moo321]

Using an unbalanced count would be a better alternative. Red seven, Zen, KO.