Does seat position matter?

Is it better to sit at 1st base in order to make the most accurate wager decisions or 3rd base in order to make the most accurate playing decisions?

It seems to me that if the count is high and I up my wager sitting at 3rd base on a full table the count could drop dramatically before my cards are delt. Although I would have more information about the remainder of the shoe after the other players have played out their hands.

What about mid field to get the best view of the cards?

Thanks for any insight

I prefer the middle of the table. Too many think that counters prefer 3rd base, and if you make an occasional "advantage play" (modified BS based on count) sitting at 3rd base attracts attention from the players when they howl in disgust when you hit and BS says stand or vice-versa.

From a pure statistical point of view, 3rd base is the best place to sit, you see all the cards before you make your playing decisions, and then once you are done the dealer is next. In SD, sitting at 1st base with a TC of +6 for example, by the time 3rd base completes his/her hand, the TC could be negative. Decisions you made are sub-optimal.

Is it better to sit at 1st base in order to make the most accurate wager decisions or 3rd base in order to make the most accurate playing decisions?

The first part about 1st base allowing a better wager decision is your misconception. I'll get to that in a minute.

You and gorilla player are correct about 3rd base allowing for a better strategy decision since you have more intelligence (albeit tiny) about the remaining cards when you play your hand.

It seems to me that if the count is high and I up my wager sitting at 3rd base on a full table the count could drop dramatically before my cards are delt.

Voodoo. You are thinking about a flow of cards. Look at it this way. Let's say it's a full table with six seats. A hand is dealt consisting of 14 cards (two cards for each player including the dealer's up and hole cards) The count drops 6 points because 4 little cards and 10 tens were dealt. (I'm using a single level count here, of course.) This is simply a mix of cards. Those extra tens could have landed at your side of the table, the other side or influenced the dealer's hand.

So, there is no edge to be gained from seat position for betting decision, but there is a tiny edge to be gained from sitting at third for strategy decisions.

Personally, I like to sit next to third base. My titanium neck has limited movement, and moving my body to count the whole table could draw attention. I find from that seat that I can view well, I'm late in the deal for strategy decisions, and I minimize the peeing and moaning about 3rd taking the bust card.

Thank you,

I was reasonably sure it didn't matter that much but in a game where your advantage is only .5-1.5 little things count.

Is it better to sit at 1st base in order to make the most accurate wager decisions

For betting purposes, it is the same for everyone.

Once the C goes up, the TC on average remains the same, whereas the RC on average returns toward zero. Therefore, in this situation, 1B will on average have a higher RC than the rest of the table. But the TC on average remains the same for all.

bkedman,

I like to play face-down pitch games, and I have found one advantage to sitting at first base: I (usually) get to see all the hole cards before having to place my next bet.

For example, if I'm sitting at third, after the dealer finishes her hand she next turns my hole cards to decide my payout. At this point, most ploppies at third immediately place the bet for the next round, but I usually need to see the rest of the cards before deciding my next bet. Conversely, if I'm at first base (and haven't doubled down), by the time the dealer gets to checking my hole cards, I already know the count and can be preparing my bet for the next round.

One condition that reverses this: southpaw dealers! They have an annoying habit of settling wagers from first to third, rather than third to first.

Just my fiftieth of a silver!

Dog Hand

I guess lefty dealers would do this
For some reason Ive noticed that many casino employees, especially pitbosses and dealers are lefty (its way more than the 10% it should be)

Anyway I like sitting at third base b/c sometimes I can see the last few cards in the back of the shoe (behind the cutcard) and add them to the count

For a non-counter I believe the 1st base is better after the first round. My reason is that the count is slightly more positive than negative after each round. This is especially true after the first round (I mean, the beginning of the second round). For example, each player averages 2.7 cards. If there are a dealer and 3 players, each round will consume from 8 cards to 20+ cards with average (mean) of 10.8 (2.7 x 4) cards. The count can only go down to a maximun of -8
(all cards dealt are aces and tens) but can go up to +20. Although the positive count applies to every player(counter) for betting decisions, the first card of the 1st player after the first round has more chance of getting an ace or ten. As the play goes on to the 2nd base or 3rd base, the occasional high positive counts in the beginning of the same round tend to go down toward zero for randomized, shuffled cards. That's because after several cards dealt to different players, the high count might deminish by then. This slightly advantageous situation tends to be more prominent on the second round of the game and gradually deminish as the play goes on to subsequent rounds.
The above argument doesn't apply to a card counter because if you know the count, you can take advantage of it to make betting decisions. The very slight advantage to the 1st base is easily surpassed by the advantage of the card counting. My argument is based on my theoretical thinking without any proof. My post is intended to get input from BJ experts to comment on my argument.