Standford Wong's book missing (crucial) betting strategy

[ArcticInferno]

I bought Professional Blackjack by Standford Wong 1994 edition for the Hi-Lo
(High Low) system.
Wong gets right into the technique in Chapter 3, but miserably fails by not explaining
the betting variation.
I was hoping to see something like, at true count of x bet y units, etc.
Wong spends a lot of time (pages) discussing the advanced/modified strategy, and then
at the end states that betting variation is more important than strategy variation.
However, Wong never talks about how to vary the bets.
The book (and Wong) is a miserable disappointment.

Arnold Snyder's Blackbelt in Blackjack 2005 edition also describes the Hi-Lo system.
He calls it Hi-Lo Lite, but for my personal purposes, it's the same thing.
First, Snyder is so-ooo busy promoting his Red Seven Count that his coverage of the
Hi-Lo system isn't very good. In Chapter 6, he constantly inappropriately refers back
to his little Red Seven Count, and he loses track of the Hi-Lo system,
and the book actually gets frustrating.
In addition, like Wong, Snyder doesn't explain the betting strategy.
Snyder introduces the "true edge" concept and adds to the confusion.

According to Wong (page 37), buy insurance if the true count is 3 or greater
(1% advantage).
However, according to Snyder (page 74), buy insurance if the "true edge" is 2,
or if the advantage is 1.5%.
So, which is correct? Buy insurance at 1% or 1.5%?

I want a balanced level one counting system, and Hi-Lo seems like the best system
that fits my needs.

We start out with -0.5% advantage.
Each positive true count (count per deck) increases the advantage by 0.5%.
At true count of 1, we're dead-even with the house.
At true count greater than 1, we're at positive advantage. Now, what do I bet?
Do you increase the bet by one unit for each increase in true count?
TC 0: bet 1 unit
TC 1: bet 2 units
TC 2: bet 3 units
TC 3: bet 4 units
TC 4: bet 4 units (5 units will arouse suspicion, so stay at 4 units)
Is the above correct?

How about this?
TC 0: bet 1 unit (disadvantage)
TC 1: bet 2 units (even)
TC 2: bet 4 units (positive advantage of 0.5%)
At true count of 2, we're at positive advantage, so why not just jump straight to the top?

 

[fwb]

My guess as to why that information is not included in Wong's book is because I can tell you from lots of sim research that optimal betting ramps can change drastically with every rule variation, so it isn't practical to give you one specific guideline that you should use for everything. Even a player leaving or joining your table changes your optimal betting ramp.

At true count of 2, we're at positive advantage, so why not just jump straight to the top?

Risk/reward. You want to scale your bets in a way that will maximize profit while keeping risk low enough to fit your bankroll. One analysis tool good for this is a number called SCORE, developed by Don Schlesinger in "Blackjack Attack", which relates profit to standard deviation. A high profit strategy with large risk can have the same SCORE as a lower profit strategy with less risk.

For demonstration purposes, here are what SCORE-optimized betting ramps would look like on a $5 table with a $100 max, S17, 80% pen.

In the Custom Bets column, I show you what it looks like to go "all out" at +2. Higher win rate, yes, but with much more risk, resulting in lower SCORE. Look at risk of ruin comparisons for a $10k bankroll. 2.3% vs 11.9%.

Variance can be your worst enemy.

 

[10JQKA]

I know this is most likely another one of those questions that depends on a lot of variables in the casino but....

Are 6 different bet amounts not a bit too strikingly obvious although optimal, I am assuming this is where you look at it and cut it down to,

eg:1 unti to a count of +1 or +2
10 untits +2/+3 to about +5 and
25 units at about +6 onwards?


If I am correct I apologize for stating the obvious and if I am wrong can someone tell me where I have misunderstood this concept please.

Thanks