Does your software have BS indices? I usually play shoe but if i wanted to practice dd do I have to go and find the bs chart and indices and study it and go back and practice or do u have the bs and indices?
Yes. For a full list of strategies included see http://www.qfit.com/card_counting_systems.htm.
It would be really nice to see you add in a separate strategy comparison segment just for AO2. Basic Omega shows a low BE. I think AO2 rates at 98. The PE may even show slightly better with AO2 than Basic Omega.
Sorry I have a lot of different bits of strategy comparison and I'm not sure which you are looking at. Basic Omega is a compromise strategy. No problem with that - in fact it's a good idea. You could say I borrowed from him on the reKO Count. But, PE is fairly meaningless with compromise strategies. I greatly respect Griffin's work. But, it was performed in another time and its emphasis is on lots on indexes, balanced counts and single deck.
What I actually meant was; it would be really great to see the comparison of Advanced Omega II just below Omega II in the "Stategy Comparison Chart", please.
http://www.qfit.com/card-counting.htm
Basic Omega II and AOII have exactly the same PE, BC and IC (assuming no side count.) Basic is a stepping stone. But, the correlations to EORs don't take into account the compromise indexes.
But the BC goes up significantly with the ace side count. I don't understand why the PE wouldn't go up at least slightly. I use AO2 with the ace side count to make a decision such as whether or not to double 10 v. 10.
Given that AO2 is so popular, I feel the scores should be shown separate of Omega 2. I'm advocating that AO2 should have its own place on the "Strategy Comparison" page.
Common wisdom tells us we should use an Ace SC for an Ace-Neutral strategy. But, in shoe games AOII works very well without a side count. The table on that page looks only at PE, BC and IC. They are the same in Basic Omega and AOII. They would be different if you applied a side count; but still the same for both strategies if you applied it to both. I had thought of adding side count effects to the table. But, the newer tables in the CVCX viewer or so much better anyhow as they provide actual simulated results given different spreads, penetrations, etc. Makes the original table only of interest to those that want to look at the bare tag values.
I was confused about something that you said:
Common wisdom tells us we should use an Ace SC for an Ace-Neutral strategy. But, in shoe games AOII works very well without a side count.
Are you talking about the effects of using the side count for playing, or are we talking you are keeping it all and using it for betting. When I first read your comments, I thought you meant the latter. So I went to your website to check out some of your charts, and I did see that Basic Omega significantly underperformed Hi Lo in the shoe game that I looked at.
Are you talking about the effects of using the side count for playing, or are we talking you are keeping it all and using it for betting. When I first read your comments, I thought you meant the latter. So I went to your website to check out some of your charts, and I did see that Basic Omega significantly underperformed Hi Lo in the shoe game that I looked at.
My tables don't include a side-count for betting unless indicated on the site.
simply uses the Ace sidecount for betting. If you choose to up the PE by using multi-parameter indexes for Ace that is a further enhancement of AO2 that normal PE/BE/IC stats do not expect.
