Hi-Lo seems to pretty much be the industry standard these days. For those of us who play shoe games, which system would you guys suggest using between KO and Hi-Lo? Let us assume the counter plays in AC, Foxwoods, and Mohegan 6 deckers.
KO seems a lot simpler given it can be used in RC mode and there are hardly any index values to memorize. All one has to do with KO is memorize how much to bet at what RC. On the other hand, Hi-Lo seems to be much more complex involving deck estimation and a TC conversion. The idea of a dealer waiting for me to place my bet in the circle because I am staring into space calculating my bet concerns me. The question on my mind is whether or not the added effort (and additional errors) are justified by any potential theoretical gain. Simulations comparing the 2 systems (I-18 Fab4) for shoe games with typical rules show SCORES which are quite similar. Hi-Lo does do better in theory, although not by much. Another added benefit of Hi-Lo is shuffle tracking, but how many players can honestly say they shuffle track with good results? How many casinos even have shuffles that are trackable? I understand that some casinos (although I personally never played in them)cover the shoe as well as the discard rack to deter counters. Hi-Lo cannot beat this game but KO would work.
Card counting is tough, especially in a casino enviornment. Perhaps simplicity is the best way to go. I heard that even legendary player Ken Uston employed an unbalanced count at the tables.
MJ
