Dont mention it! Unlike some of the other "ipre-defined" strategies, included in CVCX, the HI-LO strategies, dont specify the # of deck's, being used. I assume these are a compromise for any number of decks. (Rules are independent) Maybe Qfit might know?newb99 said:Thanks a lot for the quick response. Appreciated.
I hear what your saying, but dont forget, whether you split a pair of 22s vs 2, or hit them,(like some other splits) are both basic stategy moves, that happens to be contingent of, whether or not, DAS is permitted. The only thing silly about this, is a mere ploppy that thinks so.newb99 said:The toss up of course is the benefit of applying these deviations against the risk of getting noticed (playing a solid game and then not splitting 2s), or heat from other players when doing something that looks silly.
I don't what it does either lol. But, fwiw, they look like a single deck set of numbers to me.jack said:Dont mention it! Unlike some of the other "ipre-defined" strategies, included in CVCX, the HI-LO strategies, dont specify the # of deck's, being used. I assume these are a compromise for any number of decks. (Rules are independent) Maybe Qfit might know?
If you wanted specific indices(#of decks, rules,etc) then you would need someone to customize them for you, with the "index generation" tool, using CVData.
Then agian, this is really getting down to the nuts and bolts of it.
There are few if any splits that I use indices for - and I use a lot of indices (90 approx). zgnewb99 said:Can anyone post a complete list of splitting indexes for Hi-Lo? I appreciate their of little real $/£ value in the longer term, but am interested out of curiousity.
Thanks.
I currently have two on the grid - 7,7v8 and 9,9v7 (both at TC+3) as recommended by Mr Renzey.zengrifter said:There are few if any splits that I use indices for - and I use a lot of indices (90 approx). zg