+1,0,-2,-4,-4,+3+8

I'm sure some of you recognize that. It is the indices for double down with 9 vs dealer up card 2 through 8. I have to actually state the sequence in my head in order to make a decision. I don't know instantly that vs a dealer up-card of 4 the count to double is -2 or greater. Another sequence I like is: +2,+1,-1,-1. That's soft 13,14,15&16 verses a dealer up-card of 4. Once again, I have to say the sequence mentally to find the answer for the play. (The remainder of this post has been deleted.)

deleted

I'm not a huge fan of using sequences to learn indexes because they take longer to remember and all the extra numbers I'm thinking give me more room to lose track of the count. If you can play with full indexes that's pretty good though.

If I was playing 4, 6 or 8 decks I'd be gone too at -4.

Quote: Greasyjohn

I'm sure some of you recognize that. It is the indices for double down with 9 vs dealer up card 2 through 8. I have to actually state the sequence in my head in order to make a decision. I don't know instantly that vs a dealer up-card of 4 the count to double is -2 or greater. Another sequence I like is: +2,+1,-1,-1. That's soft 13,14,15&16 verses a dealer up-card of 4. Once again, I have to say the sequence mentally to find the answer for the play. (The remainder of this post has been deleted.)

I don't use sequences either, I just memorized them in order of importance. I never learned the index for 5 and 6 because, if on the rare occasions that I have not fled, I'd just double my minimum bet anyway and lose a penny. Who cares?

I use -1 for 3. -3 for 4. 7 for 8. And those must be S17 indices, because you would certainly double 9 against a 6 at -4 in H17. But I play 6D, so maybe the differences are warranted.