Cardoza/Silberstang Variation
In 1982, Edwin Silberstang and Avery Cardoza claimed to have systems that were definite improvements over Hi-Low primarily because their TC’s were more accurate. Instead of dividing the RC by the number of decks unseen, they suggested dividing it by the number of half-decks unseen to obtain a truer TC.
The problems with the Silberstang/Cardoza approach are many. First, whether the remaining unseen cards are rounded off to whole decks or half-decks, the resulting TC is still just an estimate, so the extra mental step involved is difficult to justify for such a questionable gain. Second, a TC based upon whole decks is a simpler concept to grasp and negates the need to memorize new MBS tables (which necessarily list indices half the magnitude of standard Hi-Low tables). Third, discriminating players take note of half-deck variations as a matter of course within their normal TC calculations anyway, without necessarily converting the remaining cards into half-deck groups. For example, if the RC is + 7, and one’s estimate suggests that there is closer to three and a half decks left rather than an even three or four, it is no more difficult to divide by the mixed number and come up with + 2 than it is to divide by 7, which equals +1. (Remember that TC’s in this proposed system are represented as only half of normal TC’s, so it works out exactly the same.) Any advantage to the player from using such a slightly more accurate TC is virtually imperceptible. An additional problem with this system is that the Aces are completely ignored as neutral cards, which creates even more troubles. Luckily, the Cardoza system only costs $129 plus shipping and handling for anyone who might still be interested.
