Sidecounting Aces

[Dyepaintball12]

Hey guys,

I have been playing a lot of DD lately and I have read that some people sidecount Aces while they play.

I currently use Hi/Lo which I read in a previous post would negate side-counting the Aces because they are already counted as -1.

Just trying to increase my edge any way I can!

- Dye

 

[forwhat77]

hi opt, side counting aces is a good transition from hi-lo...When you get good at that you can start working on the sevens as well. Many would also say the zen count is easy as well.. It's nice to know when the deck is full with aces on a high count...

 

[Jack_Black]

Ditto that. I highly recommend using an ace neutral strategy for DD and SD. The increase in Play efficiency is what's key for those games. The effect of removing good or bad cards from an SD or DD is very powerful. i.e. Take away one ace out of four in a SD and the edge swings heavily over to the house. But take away one ace out of 24 in a 6D game, and it's not so bad. So, "playing your cards right" is very important in that kind of situation.

it's really not that hard to keep using hilo for shoes and learning, say hi opt 1 for DD. It's also pretty easy to jump between the two counts if you want to play DD in the morning and 6D in the afternoon.

 

[zengrifter]

Hey guys,

I have been playing a lot of DD lately and I have read that some people sidecount Aces while they play.

I currently use Hi/Lo which I read in a previous post would negate side-counting the Aces because they are already counted as -1.

Just trying to increase my edge any way I can!

Don't bother with Ace-count bet adjusting. Worthless for HiLo.
Do not consider Ace-nuetral system for 1-2D game - not worth the effort.

Meaningful things you CAN do in 2D w/HiLo that are relatively easy -

1. Add more indices
2. Play longer and faster
3. Sit 1st base and keycard Aces​

 

[creeping panther]

A-Side

I use hi-Lo with the ace side in DD for betting purposes and it kicks ass.

I also use heavy indice plays and a few other tricks. Knowing the exact amount of aces may also warrant a few play deviations.

I really have to recommend to my associate Dye to use the hi-lo with the ace side as stated above.

Of course you want to play with as few players as possible to get full effect.

I call this the HI-Lo_Lo count.

CP

 

[zengrifter]

I use hi-Lo with the ace side in DD for betting purposes and it kicks ass.

Subjectively for you, perhaps, but it adds next to nothing, scientifically speaking. zg

 

[zengrifter]

For HiLo, if a single card side count was to be used for max gain - side counting the 7 with a simplified multiparameter adjustment for playing stiffs would add a significant gain far exceeding the nearly nothing to be gained from an Ace count. zg

 

[Jack_Black]

Do not consider Ace-nuetral system for 1-2D game - not worth the effort.

Meaningful things you CAN do in 2D w/HiLo that are relatively easy -

1. Add more indices
2. Play longer and faster
3. Sit 1st base and keycard Aces​

Gonna have to disagree.

Hi opt 1 is easier to use than hi lo. You only track 3-6 and tens.

Hi lo has terrible play efficiency, meaning that adding more indices has little effect. One of the main purposes of high PE is more effective Index playing.

It should never be about playing longer. It should be about playing efficiently, with better play efficiency.

I am all about ace tracking when given the opportunity.

 

[creeping panther]

Zen

For HiLo, if a single card side count was to be used for max gain - side counting the 7 with a simplified multiparameter adjustment for playing stiffs would add a significant gain far exceeding the nearly nothing to be gained from an Ace count. zg

,,,you and I will agree to disagree.



CP

 

[iCountNTrack]

Gonna have to disagree.

Hi opt 1 is easier to use than hi lo. You only track 3-6 and tens.

Hi lo has terrible play efficiency, meaning that adding more indices has little effect. One of the main purposes of high PE is more effective Index playing.

It should never be about playing longer. It should be about playing efficiently, with better play efficiency.

I am all about ace tracking when given the opportunity.

Hi-Opt I is a horrible count (sorry Igor), even with an ace side count for betting purposes, it just very very sightly beat Hi-Lo.
If you primarily play pitch games, and you want to do a little extra work, Hi-Opt II with ace side count for betting is the best.

 

[Billy C1]

Hi-Opt I is a horrible count (sorry Igor), even with an ace side count for betting purposes, it just very very sightly beat Hi-Lo.
If you primarily play pitch games, and you want to do a little extra work, Hi-Opt II with ace side count for betting is the best.

You're saying Hi-Lo is "worse" than a horrible count?

BillyC1

 

[iCountNTrack]

You're saying Hi-Lo is "worse" than a horrible count?

BillyC1

It is a horrible because even with the extra difficulty of side counting the aces, it barely beats Hi-Lo, for instance for a 2D H17, DAS ~ 66% pen, SCORE for Hi-Opt I/ASC is 68, while SCORE for Hi-Lo is 67, and SCORE for Hi-Opt I without ASC is 61.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Hi-Opt I is a horrible count (sorry Igor), even with an ace side count for betting purposes, it just very very sightly beat Hi-Lo.
If you primarily play pitch games, and you want to do a little extra work, Hi-Opt II with ace side count for betting is the best.

Here's another level 1 sidecount option:

For playing: 3-7 = +1, 10's = -1, unbalanced.

Betting: 2= +1 A= -1

The combined running counts give you KO, a fine betting system.

The system tags for the playing count are slightly superior to HO1.

Play it in RC mode or true counted, as you wish.

 

[Billy C1]

It is a horrible because even with the extra difficulty of side counting the aces, it barely beats Hi-Lo, for instance for a 2D H17, DAS ~ 66% pen, SCORE for Hi-Opt I/ASC is 68, while SCORE for Hi-Lo is 67, and SCORE for Hi-Opt I without ASC is 61.

Am I misinterpreting post #10 (by you)? To me, you seem to imply that Hi-Lo
is a horrible counting system. That's my question---is that what you mean???

BillyC1

 

[iCountNTrack]

Am I misinterpreting post #10 (by you)? To me, you seem to imply that Hi-Lo
is a horrible counting system. That's my question---is that what you mean???

BillyC1

I know that english is not my first language. But seriously?

Where did I say that hi-lo is a horrible count

 

[Jack_Black]

It is a horrible because even with the extra difficulty of side counting the aces, it barely beats Hi-Lo.

I actually use hi opt 2 ASC now, but hi opt 1 was a good intro into it.

Hi opt 1 is still a great count. You can add Ace and 7 counts as you get more comfortable with it. Extra difficulty of ASC? It's not that bad, at least it wasn't for me, and I'm not some mental giant. and ASC is similar to ace tracking, or at least a good intro into ace tracking, since both run on the idea of betting bigger when you expect the ace to come out.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

I know that english is not my first language. But seriously?

Where did I say that hi-lo is a horrible count

What you would seem to be saying is that if someone counted High-Low, then backed out the deuces and aces for playing and insurance purposes (which is exactly what Hi-Opt I is), he would end up with a horrible count. Being no count is made worse by sidecounting, if you are saying HO1 is horrible then you are implying High-Low is even worse.

 

[forwhat77]

Why all the hate on hi opt? It gets the money for me, but I play single deck with up to 5 rounds:grin:

If you know how to use it, Hi-opt is very efficient. Im far from a pro, but I like it.

 

[Billy C1]

I know that english is not my first language. But seriously?

Where did I say that hi-lo is a horrible count

You said Hi-Opt I is a horrible count and in the same sentence said that it (slightly?) beats Hi-Lo. (See post #10)
I interpret that to mean that Hi-Lo is even "worse" than horrible.

BillyC1

 

[London Colin]

You said Hi-Opt I is a horrible count and in the same sentence said that it (slightly?) beats Hi-Lo. (See post #10)
I interpret that to mean that Hi-Lo is even "worse" than horrible.

BillyC1

You're assuming that the only measure of horribleness is the [lack of] money-making potential.

It is a horrible because even with the extra difficulty of side counting the aces, it barely beats Hi-Lo

I'm pretty sure what iCountNTrack is saying is that Hi-Opt I is horrible, because it makes you work a lot harder for only a slight increase in reward.

Or look at it the other way around: HiLo is great, because it is easy and yet delivers nearly the same return as Hi-Opt I with an ace side count.