When you experience the power that just the plus minus count gives you, you begin to recognize that even when the count is a blistering +7 and you Split Nines against the SIX you get the six, now the true count is nudged perhaps to +8 perhaps, considering the True Count calculations still in need of one or two cards to correct to +8. SO, do you hit again? The 15 vs Six,(same count) well no. But truly you don't have enough information. Hence the need for the count that also count the little cards against the big card and each of them against the middle cards,
How to do the Count
2,3,4,5 all count as { 1,0, 0 }
6,7,8,9 all count as { 0,1, 0 }
T,J,Q,K all count as { 0,0,-2 }
So as we can see eight little cards are compared to the four big cards continuously. Further we can apply the mathematical operator of simplification at any time we get a free second for thought, (such as when the dealer scrapes the cards, for the next hand). For example {4,6,-8} become by reduction {0,2,0}. Note: by the old plus minus system the count is +5 or +6. Excellent for split the 9-9 vs 6. For the above sited Example:
Split Nines vs the Dealer's Six,
{0,7,0}good for the split
{3,4,0}weak for the split
{7,0,0}bad for the split
Because it is bad for the second hit.
Think about it !
Also note, that the count is infinitely better than the typical plus-minus counts of yesteryear and as it works out has a built in Insurance Count. I for one feel it is easier to do one thing that is a little harder than three easy things switching back and forward drives me crazy. The depth in the deck can be crudely evaluated and the similar valid approximate values arrived at, for the True Count.