Ten side count for insurance purposes?
April 15th, 2015 at 12:23:05 AM
permalink
Hey everybody, I have a question about the possibility of keeping a Ten Count ( to be more specific Tens as -2 everything else including aces +1 ) alongside a standard hi-lo count for determining more accurately when to take insurance ( with the 1.00 IC, take insurance at +24 for the 6D game I play ). I am able to use hi-lo with 18+4 and a few other indices quite comfortably and am thinking about maybe incorporating more technique into my counting such as this side count. Would it be worth it or feasible even? Any techniques for doing so simultaneously ( such as counting the cards twice and keeping the running counts partitioned in your head? ). I know it would be ideal for someone else to keep track of it, but non of my friends or BJ playing partners seem interested ( BS only players ) even though it wouldn't take much. Thanks for all the advice.
April 15th, 2015 at 1:06:45 AM
permalink
There is SOME value in it. And the bigger spread you play and more money you have out in the insurable counts, the more valuable it will be.
When I get into discussions about players using higher level counts or more index plays, neither of which is all that valuable in today's environment, I like to respond that "you are chasing pennies when you should be chasing dollars". Now in this case, this is a little more valuable than switching counts or adding index plays, so I would amend my standard comeback to "you are chasing nickels or dimes when you should be chasing dollars". :)
In my mind, this it isn't the best use of two counts. My own practice of two counts involves tracking multiple tables instead of one table with two different counts. This can allow you to jump to a better count at a moments notice. It essentially allows you to see and play almost twice as many positive counts in the same time frame, nearly doubling your win rate. What it really boils down to is that you are changing the true count frequencies, almost doubling the plus counts in your favor. I say almost and nearly, because there is some overlap and obviously you can't play both tables at the same time.
This tracking of two tables comes sort of naturally to me because the values are all the same. A 10 is the same value at each table, you just have to compartmentalize the two tables. Where as using different counts as you describe would be more difficult for me, because a 10 would have one value in one compartment and a different value in the other. To me that's much more difficult.
When I get into discussions about players using higher level counts or more index plays, neither of which is all that valuable in today's environment, I like to respond that "you are chasing pennies when you should be chasing dollars". Now in this case, this is a little more valuable than switching counts or adding index plays, so I would amend my standard comeback to "you are chasing nickels or dimes when you should be chasing dollars". :)
In my mind, this it isn't the best use of two counts. My own practice of two counts involves tracking multiple tables instead of one table with two different counts. This can allow you to jump to a better count at a moments notice. It essentially allows you to see and play almost twice as many positive counts in the same time frame, nearly doubling your win rate. What it really boils down to is that you are changing the true count frequencies, almost doubling the plus counts in your favor. I say almost and nearly, because there is some overlap and obviously you can't play both tables at the same time.
This tracking of two tables comes sort of naturally to me because the values are all the same. A 10 is the same value at each table, you just have to compartmentalize the two tables. Where as using different counts as you describe would be more difficult for me, because a 10 would have one value in one compartment and a different value in the other. To me that's much more difficult.
