Using Hi-Lo vs. Hi-Opt I for DD

[Lonesome Gambler]

Say one uses Hi-Lo with 35 indices for 6D games and decides to play some DD (H17, DAS, RSA, 1-8 spread). The player can either use the exact same count and indices for DD (although they're not quite accurate and the PE is not great) or they can play Hi-Opt I using the I18 but no Ace side-count. The PE is better with the latter, but Hi-Lo w/ 35 6D indices out-performs Hi-Opt here. Would you play DD in a somewhat half-assed manner like this, or do you consider it a waste of time without more indices and an Ace side-count?

For the record, I've played DD using Hi-Opt I with and without a side-count. I'm just surprised how well Hi-Lo w/ 35 indices performs here, and I'm weighing the options of just going the simple route vs. more optimal play when training new players.

 

[FLASH1296]

You said: "when training new players ..."

If you are forming a team, then it is best to keep matters as simple as you can. Hi-Lo suffices.

Hi-Opt I has an undeserved bad rep', because almost nobody plays it as it was designed
(by Julian Braun) to be employed — with side counted Aces & Sevens.
Because so few ranks of cards are tagged, multi-parameter side-counting is facilitated.

I use Hi-Opt II for DD and ZEN for shoe games, but I started out with Hi-opt I.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Say one uses Hi-Lo with 35 indices for 6D games and decides to play some DD (H17, DAS, RSA, 1-8 spread). The player can either use the exact same count and indices for DD (although they're not quite accurate and the PE is not great) or they can play Hi-Opt I using the I18 but no Ace side-count. The PE is better with the latter, but Hi-Lo w/ 35 6D indices out-performs Hi-Opt here. Would you play DD in a somewhat half-assed manner like this, or do you consider it a waste of time without more indices and an Ace side-count?

For the record, I've played DD using Hi-Opt I with and without a side-count. I'm just surprised how well Hi-Lo w/ 35 indices performs here, and I'm weighing the options of just going the simple route vs. more optimal play when training new players.

1-8 is a pretty good spread, you might as well use the count with the high BC. Or if you are teaching new players, you can teach them Zen. Especially if they are going to be working together, you don't want the confusion of multiparameter counts.

 

[muppet]

hi-lo beats hi-opt i w/ a side of aces in dd
http://www.qfit.com/Book/z6202chart.gif

that is with both counts using the sweet 16 indices
http://www.qfit.com/book/ModernBlackjackPage189.htm

and while we're on the subject, reko (Norm's simplified ko) beats hi-lo in dd and sd. that said, i may be switching from hi-lo to some form of ko..

 

[FLASH1296]

I would use Hi-Opt I ONLY with side-counted Aces & Sevens, while armed with a full raft of indices.

In any case, all Level Two counts are superior to all Level One counts in a pitch game.

 

[Finn Dog]

and while we're on the subject, reko (Norm's simplified ko) beats hi-lo in dd and sd. that said, i may be switching from hi-lo to some form of ko..

I'm sure you're already aware of this, but if you do switch, you might consider TKO because of how it overcomes KO's inherent weakness: betting too little early, betting too much late.

Regards,

FD

 

[muppet]

hmm, yeah that is something about unbalanced counts i was worried about. since even the simple reko beats hi-lo, then i guess it is not so bad as i first thought. i've always had some difficulty in fully wrapping my head around unbalanced counts on points such as these

 

[Bondy3]

I would use Hi-Opt I ONLY with side-counted Aces & Sevens, while armed with a full raft of indices.

In any case, all Level Two counts are superior to all Level One counts in a pitch game.

how does a side count of aces AND sevens work? I just side count aces, I thought 7's were a neutral card

 

[FLASH1296]

Sevens are valuable for the PLAY of your hands in a “pitch game”
when you have 12,13,14, 4-4, 3-3 A-3, A-2; not to mention when
the dealer shows a 5, 6, 7, 8, or (especially) 9.

Just imagine two extreme situations:
All eight Sevens are unplayed and All eight Sevens have been depleted from the DD.

Getting the picture yet ? Just as with Aces, your R.C. Is temporarily adjusted for the play of the hand (but not for bet-sizing)

There is good stuff on this issue of multi-parameter side-counts and the value of Side-Counting other cards as well — in The Theory of Blackjack.

 

[Deathclutch]

hi-lo beats hi-opt i w/ a side of aces in dd
http://www.qfit.com/Book/z6202chart.gif

that is with both counts using the sweet 16 indices
http://www.qfit.com/book/ModernBlackjackPage189.htm

and while we're on the subject, reko (Norm's simplified ko) beats hi-lo in dd and sd. that said, i may be switching from hi-lo to some form of ko..

Is that chart assuming a true count of the tags or used as is in unbalanced form? That would make a large difference in those results.

 

[muppet]

unbalanced ko with very rounded indices (just 1 index number for all of them)