Thank you for stating your fair and reasonable position. You have extensive data that purports to prove that the only way to beat the game of Blackjack is some variation of card counting, modifying card play based on the true count and increasing bet sizes when the true count is positive. I do not challenge the work, skill and testing that has been done. I challenge that card counting and its derivatives is the only route to beat the game. The card counter's basic primise is an untested hypothesis. That extensive card counting data are present does not mean that other accounting routines were tested.
In fairness, if you read almost any modern review, you will find an authoritative discussion debunking some "progression" that has not been used by investor bettors in the last 300 years. Accounting based betting techniques are not available to the reading public. An action of a 1,000,000,000 event test that appears to produce a .01% gain is spurious accuracy with no real world applicability. The results of a 200 event decision tree is often quite different than expections from a 1,000,000 decision tree.
Blackjack writers have indicated that even with perfect play, only a minor advantage over the casino is gained. It is not rare to have swings of capital, both upward and downward. A card counter may be under water for a week or more. Additionally, card counting has no applicability against a CSM (continuous shuffle machine) or an electronic deal (there may be an eight deck shoe, shuffled after every deal) and very slight applicability in a shoe game when the cut card is not deeply placed. A bettor does not need to know the results of the 1,000,000 decision tree with exactitude, only accouting routines that will safely carry through the next hundred or so decisions.
Someone initially confronting a Blackjack game is more concerned with the next 50 bets. My approach is that accounting can defeat the Blackjack game. Accounting routines are developed for the worst probable circumstances. An initial visitor to casino Blackjack will be better served by reading my book than any of the 150 or so books that you have in your library. Some of your books are by authors such as Charles Einstein, Lawrence Revere, Stanford Wong, Arnold Snyder, John Archer, Leon Dubey, Ken Uston, John Scarne, Jerry Patterson, Cooper and Humble, and so on. The idea of card counting is fairly new in the United States, perhaps only 60 years old. The art of card counting is much older. Card sense, card recognition and casing a deck were skills the preceeded the modern ideas of card counting. Victor Bethell described card counting (but not with Blackjack) circa 1900.
You will not like my book, it disagrees with many of your fondest beliefs. I do not reccomend that you buy it.