Counting Systems

Which count system is better, the Omega 2 or the Hi Opt 2???

I don't know - I'm just comparing Wong's book to K-O Blackjack. One counts sevens as +1, Wong's book counts sevens as 0. Is there a definitive or preferable answer? I just spent the last 5 days 3 hours a day counting them, until I received Wong's book today. Horror! I was doing so well. Thanks!

But Advanced Omega II is also a very powerful system, and you'll probably see no difference in performance between the two.

Different count systems will value the cards differently. The K-O and Hi Lo are similar counts in that they're both level one, but the K-O is unbalanced and therefore is able to count the 7 as +1 while the Hi Lo can't.

Thanks so much for the quick response. I guess since I've already spent so much time counting them as +1 I'll stay with that. I appreciate the info.!

The actual value of sevens is close to one half. And counted as
+1/2 in Wong's "halves" count. Wong's halves count can be mentally
comforting becuase the values of the count are very close to
the actual value of removal of each card (as in for instance
Griffin's Elephant edition). I've recently switched from Hi-Lo
to halves when I realized this, and understood the halves count
as just a variation of Hi-Lo -- if the 9s and 7s go by too fast,
just switch back to Hi-Lo and you'll still have as accurate or more
of a pack-count than if you'd done Hi-Lo throughout. I didn't think
of halves as a "four level count" which technically it is. I like
the count and like knowing its accurate value of the pack. But in
practice I find it tiring and harder than Hi-Lo to do without being
obvious. I'm hoping it will become rote to my little brain, but if
not I may switch back to Hi-Lo.

I agree with misfit's last comment; some of the differences are between systems are so small that it requires many millions of simulated hands to differentiate between them.

As I always tell any friends who ask, since most of us don't get that many millions of hands, the differences in systems pale in comparison to the differences in our ability to implement them. From that vantage point, it is far more important to choose a system that you feel comfortable with.

not to assume that your ace adjustment would be 100% accurate becuase it would not be. The tiny differences in estimation probably makes up for more than other counts differnce in efficiency. How'd you like to be in a fast paced 6 deck game after playing for many hours you now have to exactly figure with 2 3/4 of 6 decks remaining and you are short 3 1/2 aces. Good luck on perfect estimation. That is why Zen is so good as it has no ace adjustment and the tiny difference in efficiency is meaningless.

but you can see how counting four red sevens as plus 4 and four
black sevens as 0 yields a less accurate measure of the value of
the pack, than does counting all sevens as half.

Halves count also counts 2s as half, nines as -half, and 5s as
1 and half. But read Wong's Professional Blackjack to understand
it.

recommeds counting ALL 7's as .5, not just the red ones. For the original system you're correct, but the newer version, Radar is correct.

Actually, if you're not going to keep a side count of Aces, then the Zen Count and the Mentor Count will both outperform Omega and Hi-Opt II. All four are level two systems.