RoR too high for this spread?

[pooptarts92]

I'm very sick of back counting and constantly get into verbal arguements for jumping into peoples shoes so I wanted a low risk but small bankroll. Let's call it a $2000 bankroll for now, a replenishable one.
The rules:
H17
4 deck
DAS
DA2
No resplit aces
surrender allowed (early sur vs 10, NO sur vs ace)
4 splits max
BJ 3:2
Insurance 2:1
hopefully not forgetting anything

and i was planning on this bet spread, but any responses can adjust it based on the RoR it potentially has:
wong out at tc -1
tc1: $5 min
tc2: $10
tc3: $15
tc4: $20
tc5: $25 max?
I'm thinking maybe 25 should be my max bet at such a small br, replenishable or not. any suggestions or help is much appreciated.

 

[Bondy3]

that is an awesome game, Its far better than the game I play,

I may just be a risky guy, But the game I play is basically the same game as you except 6 decks and I dont wong, I have about the same bankroll as you (well, double, but my unit size is twice your unit size so its effectivly the same)

My ramp is something like
TC Bet
0 _ $10
1 _ $10
2 _ $25
3 _ $50 or 2x$30
4 _ $100 or 2x$50
5 _ $200 or 2x$100
6 _ $200 or 2x$200

with a bankroll around 4k ish, but that is risky. it all depends on what you consider to be an acceptable RoR

 

[daddybo]

Probably $5 to 2x $40... would be what I would do. Play all except Wong out in the more negative counts if you can. (go to the head.. Talk on the phone)

 

[pooptarts92]

ok well the idea is just the tc multiplied by a $5 unit. what kind of max bet should i go with?

 

[daddybo]

ok well the idea is just the tc multiplied by a $5 unit. what kind of max bet should i go with?

Max bet of two hands of $40 ($80 total). Or if you don't want to do two hands.. $50 single hand max bet. This should be fairly *safe* if you are up to the game.

I don't usually follow the raise your bet x units at the incremental increase in count philosophy. It looks too mechanical and is very easy to spot. I usually raise and lower in snatches and grabs somewhat erratically.