Hi/Lo or Halves ??????

I have been using the Hi/Lo counting system for years.I'm wondering if it might be better to switch to the halves counting system? Has anyone used both and could give me some input.The Hi/Lo I can keep up with even when distracted by the pit personnel and the cocktail waitresses.I'm just wondering if I should leave what I know for something that would be new.I have heard the halves is better,but is it worth learning a new count and leaving one I can do in my sleep basically.

Thanx

I think it would only be worth it if you play single or double deck.

You should keep in mind that this is a 3-level-count.So before you even consider switching you should try it at home.If you haven't brought it down to 30 seconds per deck after a month's training you can forget it.
Most people have difficulties dealing with fractions, so the Uston APC or Revere count would probably be more realistic alternatives.

Francis Salmon

According to Wongs Professional Blackjack, for his benchmark game (6 decks, 1 deck cut, S17, 10-1 spread, play all, etc) Halves yields $17 v HiLos $16. The indices are very close. I switched and didn't regret it but it is a lot more work. I never got tired playing HiLo. Halves would start showing an effect after 8+ hours, or so. Lots of people like to one up others. Don't get caught up in the "Well I use a higher level count therefore I must be better/smarter than you." Is the 6% gain worth it to you for the extra work? If it is, then switch. It was worth it for me.

Well said, anonimuss. I switched to a higher level count, not Halves, but a multiple level count, a while back after playing hiLo for a number of years. Although I didn't struggle with the higher count, I never was able to play as effortlessly as hiLo, so after 18 months I switched back to hilo.

As anonimiss states, simulations show an increase in the single digits for most 6 deck games, depending on the rules and penetration. What the simulation doesn't show is how that small increase can be wiped out with one or two mistakes, quicker fatigue, occasional loss of count, ect. I am a proponent of playing a simple count and playing as well as possible rather than moving up to a higher level count. The simplicity of hilo allows me side count and take advantage of other AP moves and techniques that I might not otherwise be able to. This is just my opinion based on the games that I play. If you play a lot of single and double deck games, such a move may be more beneficial to you.

Thanx for the input.I think I'll stick with the Hi/Lo for now.

Thanx again

makes you slow and cumbersome. Eventually, counting halves will be absolutely automatic. My speed with Hi Lo was instantaneous. My speed with Halves is only a nanosecond slower. I don't tire - I can keep side counts if I want.

Single-deck shines. All the rest just languish.

so Halves, even for the benchmark six deck game with the conservative shoe spread (for play-all) of 1-10 still yeilds 6.25% higher return.

That's $20 to $30 per hour for black chip level play. Some people find it worth it.

It's important to know your limitations. I used the Halves Doubled approach when I tried it and the 3 level nature of it was just too much mental gymnastics. Zen has about the same level of performance at Halves and is only two levels.

"so Halves, even for the benchmark six deck game with the conservative shoe spread (for play-all) of 1-10 still yeilds 6.25% higher return."

Just asking. :-)

Don