Is any seat at the BJ table any better then the other, 1st base, middle, third base? Also the # of players at the table, would a total of 3 / 4 players against the dealer be better then a full table of 6 /7 players.. baseing these assumptions on using a hi-lo count if that matters.
thanks.....
> Is any seat at the BJ table any better then the other,
> 1st base, middle, third base?
Depends on what you mean by "better." There is always a slight edge to playing last, because, if you are using strategy departure index numbers, the more cards you see, the more accurate your decision, when it comes time to play your hand. That said, there are other non-mathematical considerations that might argue for a different seat.
1. It's sometimes hard to see cards (dealer's arm gets in the way, distance) at the other end of the table (first base), when you're sitting at third base.
2. Some discard trays have an opaque panel on the side that faces third base, making it difficult or impossible to see the discards mounting in the tray, for true-count calculations.
3. Traditionally, it is believed that the more knowledgeable players like to sit at third base, to "control the flow" of the cards, and other such nonsense, so it might be better not to be associated with that seat. If you make a departure, all eyes are on you, and when the dealer fills a hand that he would have otherwise broken, had you played traditionally, the assholes come out in number to criticize you.
First base is bad for a couple of reasons:
1. You are "under the gun" and must act immediately. So, if you want to count all the cards on the table before making your play, you need to be very fast. Just not worth the extra hassle.
2. You don't get to see any of the hit cards for the round before making your play, as opposed to sitting farther to the left.
As you can probably tell, my personal choice, if the seats are open, is to take the middle one of seven, or to leave two seats to my left and three to my right, if there are six.
> Also the # of players at
> the table, would a total of 3 / 4 players against the
> dealer be better then a full table of 6 /7 players.
Mathematically, your edge is fairly constant no matter how many players there are. But, playing alone, you might get 200 rounds per hour, or more, while playing with a full table, you might get only about 55-60. So, time is money. I prefer to play with one or two other players.
> basing these assumptions on using a hi-lo count if
> that matters.
No, it doesn't.
> thanks.....
You're welcome!
Don
Posting Permissions
-*-
Bookmarks