Simple versus Advanced Count

Right now I am switching from Silver Fox to the basic Hi-Lo count (both Level I counts I believe), but my question is is there really that huge a difference between a Level I count and an advanced Level III count? I mean ideally I guess if you were able to use an advanced level III count with as much precision as a simple count you would yield better results, but is this additional gains that significant? I am a beginner and thats why I'm using a Hi-Lo count which seems to be much simpler than some of the advanced counts. I guess my question is can I still do some serious damage at the casinos if I perfect the Hi-Lo count as opposed to the tougher system? Or if I decided to become a serious card counter would it be advised to switch to a more advanced count later? Thank you for your input.

You win $17 dollars with Halves vs $16 with Hi-Lo per Professional Blackjack.

Why leave that money on the table if you can mentally handle the count.

Maybe it's because TIME really is MONEY!

I guess another question I have is that with an easier system would you say you have more longevity in the casinos as you will be able to cover yourself more easily from the pit bosses? I would think that if you are spending less time looking at cards and able to interact with other players dealer etc. that you will be in it more for the long haul? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Courtesy of http://www.qfit.com/cvcxonlineviewer.htm

Number are HiLo I18+F4, KO preferred, and Halves I18+F4

2D D17, DAS, 42 cut, 1-8: 50.55, 53.09, 54.29
2D H17, DAS, 42 cut, 1-8: 36.46, 37.59, 39.11
6D S17, DAS, LS, 78 cut, 1-10: 27.95, 26.50, 30.22
6D H17, DAS, LS, 78 cut, 1-10: 17.98, 16.97, 19.22

No one can decide for you and you are almost bound to going with your gut in this decision.

A count system that is simpler means sacrificing a (theoretically) higher win rate. Uston addressed this in his Million Dollar Blackjack. Uston played RAPC '73 and stated that comparison of team results with groups playing High-Low showed the complex counts were distinctly more profitable. But in his last writings, he seemed ambivalent about the value of complexity.

No matter how nimble-minded one is, there comes a point where the increased complexity has real costs that nullify the theoretical advantages. In the mid-seventies, the now defunct Win magazine printed the departure pictograms for the Heath-Friedstedt Bi-Variate count, the same one described in Griffin's Theory of Blackjack. In the spring of 1978 I committed these tables to memory and practiced the keeping of the two simultaneous running counts. I spent that summer playing the D10 single deck games in Reno/Sparks and the cow towns of Northern Nevada. Easy money? After twenty minutes of play I needed a rest. After forty minutes, I needed a nap. After returning to Las Vegas and the four-deck games, I dropped it.

I can play HO2 with separate aces for fourteen breakless hours with no apparent loss of ability. But reaping the benefit of Heath-Friedstedt's exciting win rate over extended play was, for me, impossible.

Yes, the power of compounding means that a slight increase in win rate results in a decidedly larger bankroll a year from now. If you have no mathematical or financial background, try comparing results of a thousand hours of play using an electronic spreadsheet. The differences are (literally) exponential and can be enormous. But it may be a mirage. Knowing how high you can bring your sustained win rate is something you can, at best, determine by tinkering. But once you've made a decision, stick to it. You can squander hundreds of hours flip-flopping, hours that could have translated directly into bankroll growth.

So as a beginner should I start out with a Hi-Lo strategy or go to an advanced strategy and just wait longer until I master the more advanced strategy? It seems like a waste to try to a master an easy system only to rip it apart and start over with a more advanced system? Correct me if I am wrong. I know this is an ambiguous question, but can you realistically say earn a couple thousand a month with any consistency with a simple system like Hi-Lo? Thank you all again for your input.

Your "couple of thousand a month with any consistency" results will be influenced far more by factors other than what (valid) count system you use. You are worrying about the digits to the right of the decimal point, when you should be considering the digits to the left of the decimal point.

You can never expect to earn anything with consistency if you play blackjack. I haven't had a payday from our group since August 2005 due to an extended losing streak which reached -$211,000 at one point. Currently we're down $33,000 and still digging and no telling when we're gonna have a distribution.

In answer to the play longer with an easier system question...I use Zen and don't find it any harder or more tiring than HiLo. If I had to use a system with an Ace sidecount like AO2 I'm sure I'd find it fatiguing somewhat...but I don't play more than 4-5 hours a day max anyway at my stakes.

I heard good things but not a lot of info... My feeling is that an unbalanced count is good for cover because you don't have to look at the discard rack... Not that they can't identify you, just might take longer... Of course you want to keep sessions short and not at the same shift/same casino too often...

all the distractions. Do you stare at the discard rack? I just glance at it at the end of the round usually, since most cards are still on the table when my playing decisions are made.

Just find a count you like, learn it backward and forward, and then play. Forget which is better. All will work. A weak system played perfectly will stomp a more powerful system played with lots of errors.

And hi-lo gets me exhausted after 12+ hours so I not switching...

Eliminating fluctuation from expectation is a Holy Grail, much pursued and never realized. It is a chicken with lips, that is, something which does not exist.

Stanford Wong once wrote, I recall, an essay upon this. Fluctuation serves to mask expectation. In this, it serves you. But it is also a great burden, as the long run has this infuriating habit of refusing to assert itself right now!

Your remedy for this? Well, there is no true remedy. If there were, all the system players would use it, and the games would long ago have disappeared. But there is a palliative: finely dividing your bankroll. This reduces the amount you can win over a fixed time, but it inoculates you from over betting which will, inevitably, bankrupt you.

FWIW, anytime you read or hear of some method of wagering which depends on pattern recognition, patterns based upon the immediately preceding outcomes, be very suspicious. It didn't work for Nick the Greek, regardless of remarks attributed to him. It didn't work for the contemporaries of Pascal. It didn't work for the Cavemen. And it won't work for you.

you r trying to grind it out with a small edge, so basically you need all the help that you can get.
more complex system is not as tiring as most would think (however, i do have to agree that a side count system is in fact more troublesome!)
when you get proficient with a system, counting out decks with, in my case (doubled halves), is pretty much the same as counting with hi-lo.
there is no extra efforts required. you still glance at the cards once, and the count is registered is your brain.
of cos, that requires alot of practice. dont expect to practice at home for a week or two and then be able to do it with the ease of hi-lo.
with that slightly higher gain you can afford to give up some of dead give away strategies which will get you heat and still get a nice return for your investment.
it's all about practice practice and practice!!!

friend of mine told me _many_ years ago: "Castle if you want to, or if you have to, but _not_ just because you can..." (He was quoting someone else, but making a point).

I would paraphrase that to "change systems if you want to, or if you have to (say a team uses something different than your counting system but you want to join them), but _not_ just because you can change."

If you want a better PE, there is an obvious way to get it, if you are using HiLo. But make sure you _really_ need better PE first. If you are playing shoes, it might not be worth the extra effort and time required to learn a new system, for the return you get on your investment.

HiLo doesn't tire me out at all, except that sometimes I try to "turn it off" when playing a card game other than 21. And not counting cards takes a little more effort than counting them if you have practiced/played enough, at least for me. If you walk by a group playing bridge, and you think "dummy has +3" you will know what I mean. :)

There are dozens of reasons to change a counting system. Not many of those reasons are very good... If you've been playing HiLo in shoes, and find yourself able to play some very good SD games, but you need a minimal spread to avoid getting barred, then a high-PE system can be just the ticket. If you want another 2% win rate boost, it might not be worth the effort. If you want to switch just because some chart says the PE is .53 vs .51, you are probably making a poor decision.