Comparison of the table numbers for 12 v 2 and 16 v 7 with those of Braun or Wong will reveal this clearly. Specifically, the middle cards, 7 8 & 9, were over-represented in the undealt subset. Was having absolutely precise indexes available for departure decisions a tremendous benefit? No, not really, because the decision tables in the book are substantially error-ridden. But with shuffling of the discards to complete a hand a frequent event, knowing the exact number of cards undealt was advantageous. Sometimes the portion of the pack remaining undealt was obvious, sometimes not. Most games were singledecked with discards collected to the bottom of the pack. There was an exact index numerated by the running count and denominated by number of unseen cards. In the '66 edition of BTD there was no estimated true count. is the high-low method with the indexes as ed thorp explains it in 'beat the dealer' the best one? The question is, will you play enough to be able to stay on top of all the n-level indices for correct play to take advantage of the better playing efficiency? Will you be able to keep up with the count at all if you don't play regularly?Īs another responder said, the best system is the one you can play well. So, you can go with a 2-level count (or higher) and improve the playing accuracy a bit (not much help in betting however as hi-lo is very good there). But it isn't _that_ much lower, just lower. So hi-lo has a lower playing efficiency than some other counts (2-level in particular). IE when you double on a 11, you want a 10, not an ace. Since the Hi-Lo system counts aces and 10s together, you can make some playing mistakes.

Part 1 is betting big when you have the advantage and betting small when you don't. If you do it right, you can make money with it. Comparable to which is the best car to buy, etc.

High low methode blackjack