Moving from Hi-Lo Lite to Hi-Lo

I've been using Snyder's Hi-Lo Lite and I really like it. It is simple, easy, and so far has been productive. However, I'm going to try to learn to play Spanish and the guide that I have for it (thanks for the recommendation Don) uses Hi-Lo as the counting system. The only difference is really how the edge is calculated. Arnold's system gives a 1% change in edge for every count integer and Hi-Lo gives a 0.5% change for every count integer. I can do that, but I'm wondering what to do with the indices that I've learned for Hi-Lo Lite?

Example, the index for Insurance with Hi-Lo Lite is +2, this edge would translate to a Hi-Lo count of +4. However, the insurance index for Hi-Lo is +3, not +4. Another example, the index for 16 vs 10 is 0 with Hi-Lo Lite, but +1 for Hi-Lo. So my question is, do I lose and additional advantage if I just do a conversion of my Hi-Lo Lite indices to a Hi-Lo TC. A better way to put it may be if I do just convert the count, am I any worse off than I am now?

I figure that eventually I'll relearn new indices for Hi-Lo, but for now I only want to change one thing, and that is how I'm calculating the TC. Once that is down, then I can make index changes.

Opinions please.

Hello Dhays,

I will give you my current understanding of this topic. I invite anyone to please correct me if anything I state is inaccurate.

As I understand it Arnold's system for Hi-Lo Lite uses a conversion to true edge based on half decks remaining. i.e. if the RC = 16 and there are 4 decks remaining then you have a numerator of 16 with a denominator of 8 (4 decks x 2 to represent the half decks remaining) which gives you a true edge value of 2%.

If you didn't use the true edge conversion you would instead use the true count conversion by dividing the RC by the full decks remaining which by way of my example above would be 16/4 = 4. This value represents the true count not the true edge. We assume that when using this system each point of true count is worth approximately 0.5% which in fact correlates, in this case, to the true edge of 2% as shown above. It is just a matter of how you choose to calculate it.

My point here is not to suggest that you didn't already know how to make these conversions but to instead show that it is not accurate to state that calculating the true edge based on the remaining half decks correlates to a 1% change in edge per integer value. It is in fact a direct conversion to true edge that skips having to calculate the true count then convert from the true count to the true edge which is one of the main points for using the Hi-Lo Lite indices as you are able to make all of your play and betting decisions based on one value without having to convert back and forth. This is in addition to the fact that all of the Hi-Lo Lite indices are rounded to whole numbers for easier memorization and recall.

To address the issue of the insurances indices (and several others) having slightly different values I offer the following explanation:

Arnold's index values for Hi-Lo Lite are all true edge values calculated based on the half decks remaining as stated above. For simplicity he rounds several of these indices to whole numbers that are easier to remember while sacrificing very little in the way of playing efficiency. For example the index value of 2 for insurance is in contrast to the value suggested by the I18 where you take insurance at a true count of 3 which is in fact a true edge of 1.5%. Arnold feels it is much easier to remember whole numbers thus reducing possible errors while playing. This rounding to whole numbers sacrifices a very marginal amount in the way of playing efficiency - i.e. taking insurance at a true count of 4 rather than 3. That being said, technically speaking, you would be playing correctly either way.

Just to make one more example I'll address the index value for 16v10. The I18 suggests standing, assuming surrender is not an option, when the true count is 1, true edge of 0.5%, or higher. Arnold rounds this value down to 0 as standing would be more correct at 0 or higher as opposed to a true edge of 1%, true count of 2, or higher were he to round up instead. Again the playing efficiency difference between the I18 and Arnold's true edge indices is very marginal and you would be technically playing correctly either way.

Should you desire to run Arnold's numbers through a simulator and compare them to the I18 you would simply multiply all of the Hi-Lo Lite index values by 2 before inputting them into the simulator. This would convert all of them into a true count format. I hope I answered your questions accurately. Again, please let me know if anything I have stated is incorrect and/or if further elaboration is desired.

Zuul

dhays:

Until you learn the hi-lo indexes, you can half Snyder's TE index #'s when using a hi-lo TC. It will not cost you anything, when compared to using hi-lo lite.

That being said, spend an hour learning the Illustrious 18 hi-lo indexes and I believe it will yield a slight improvement over hi-lo lite.

HockeXpert

...for both responses to my question. I appreciate your explanation Zuul. I already knew what you wrote, you just did a better job of articulating it. HockeXpert, that is exactly what I wanted to know. I think you meant to write just "double" Arnold's indexes since a TE of 2 would equal a TC of 4.

I'll learn the Ill 18 for Hi-Lo after this weekend. I've got to take a little business trip over tomorrow night and it just so happens that I'll go right by a set of casinos that I've never been to before. :-) According to CBJN, I should fine a 6D h17,ds,ls,rsa,80% and a DD h17,ds,ls,rsa,65% game. Better rules than I'm used to at my local casinos. I'll drop by each at two different times Thursday and Friday and see how it goes.

See the chapter entitled "Catch-22" in Blackjack Attack, 3rd ed. by Don Schlesinger.

There you will find all of the more important indices, adjusted for Risk Aversion.

Playing blackjack without studying this text is an egregious error; but for a Hi-Lo
player "B.J.A." needs to be considered your syllabus; "required reading" and the
prerequisite for your matriculation to that of a skilled Hi-Lo card Counter.

To state this succinctly, "B.J.A." is "all that you'll ever need." Thank me later.

I'm adding books to my library little by little. I just finished reading the last book that Don suggested. Of course, just reading a book on BJ isn't all that useful, it is the constant rereading, study, practice, read some more, etc... that is useful.

But I'll take your advice. I've seen enough recommendations for it to make me think it is worthwhile.

I'm going to chime in with a "I whole-heartedly agree" when it comes to Blackjack Attack! I'm new to advantage play and have just about worn out the pages of my copy. My next step was to find a mentor. I found an excellent one right here on this message board that is tireless in his response to my hundreds of questions.