Pick a Seat

  • Thread starter Thread starter WVHillbilly
  • Start date Start date

Which seat do you want?

  • Total voters
    58
WVHillbilly

WVHillbilly

Legend
Silver Level
Poker Chips
0
Casino Coins
0
You're about to sit down at a 100nl table with a full 100bb buy-in. No matter which seat you choose a 20bb short stacker will sit down in the other seat. This is the only table available, so if you want to play you must choose a seat.

Seat A or B?

Table
 
I would take A in a cash game. I don't want someone like that moving in on me constantly if I raise. In a tournament, I'd prefer to be in seat B, because the short stacker is more likely to just fold, hoping to get further into the money by outlasting a few more people, so in that case, you could likely steal some blinds.
 
It's a 100nl cash table. You don't often get to pick your seat in a tournament.
 
WVHillbilly said:
It's a 100nl cash table. You don't often get to pick your seat in a tournament.
Click to expand...

I know that. I'm talking about which seat is more beneficial to have, not what seat I'm necessarily picking.
 
in a cash game, yeah definitely A. if you chose B, it would be really disastrous if u have semi-decent hands or mid pairs, calling a raise from the bb, only for the short stacker to your left who limped in, raise all-in, whether as a frustration move or a genuine trap.
 
Seat A..........

I prefer to seat loose players to my right and the tighter players to my left.

If I take seat A, then to my left I have 100,100, 65, and 40. And to my right, I have 100, 100, 20, and 25.

The 65 and 40 might be playing tighter since they are down, but not out. But the 20 and 25 might be willing to put all in from thinking it's now or never. At least from the left of 20 and 25 I have position advantage and can play the table as a result. Starting from this position will also increase my chance to correctly apply implied pot odds on hands I can see them play, especially if they play in the same hand.
 
Last edited:
I would have to go with A, better to react to the two shorter stacks and try and catch them shoving with nothing to gain up some more $$
 
A for the same reason the others are saying. I don't want to have to deal with a constant shove on my left.
 
I think a lot of people are answering this as if it's a tournament and shortstacks are constantly shoving just to stay alive. well it's cash people, so they're not !

I know why you're doing this WV, and what your reasons are for choosing the seat that u are. But from my past history, and just the way I would do it in real life I have to say A.
 
c9h13no3 said:
Seat B and its not close.
Click to expand...

came here to write this verbatim

edit: wow, i'm actually in shock that so many people are saying A. this is almost not even a matter of opinion, tbh. if you adjust the right way and play well, B will be more profitable in general
 
Last edited:
eNTy said:
I think a lot of people are answering this as if it's a tournament and shortstacks are constantly shoving just to stay alive. well it's cash people, so they're not !

I know why you're doing this WV, and what your reasons are for choosing the seat that u are. But from my past history, and just the way I would do it in real life I have to say A.
Click to expand...

I'm only asking the question because I am curious after the discussion in the micro thread.
 
A is a bad seat and B is a pretty good one, c9 is correct that its not close.

Shortstackers are typically nits and those are the ideal people to have on your left for obvious reasons. If you get 3bet you should know they have a pretty solid hand and they wont be floating really ever.

Having short stacks on your right is also not good, unless they are terrible and not just huge nits. Since you are in position against the people immediately to your right the most you typically get the most money from those seats. If they are a couple nits you arent getting anything from them. you want to 50/5 to your right so you can isolate everyhand not the 7/5 who the only way you get money from is both have huge hands.
 
WVHillbilly said:
I'm only asking the question because I am curious after the discussion in the micro thread.
Click to expand...

I think it's a great question and not one I've seen discussed much 🙂
 
B >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A

Most short stacks are massive nits whose only real move is "shove". They can be stolen from all day long from the right mostly successfully. If you get raised on a steal who the hell cares if the shorty has $10 or $100 behind if you are going to fold anyway.

Plus... I'd rather have a bigger advantage over a bigger ($100) stack instead of a $20 one.
 
nice work WV, this has made some good convo our discussion over this shorty issue.

could somebody explain in detail in another thread the reasoning or link to an article about this or a video about this issue.
 
agree with B like most others, skipping past points raised, another point is the fact the 2 half stacks are less likely to steal from CO and HJ due to their stack sizes
 
Jurn8 said:
nice work WV, this has made some good convo our discussion over this shorty issue.

could somebody explain in detail in another thread the reasoning or link to an article about this or a video about this issue.
Click to expand...

It's pretty simple, like I already said in the micro stakes thread, stealing blinds is small part of our winning, we want to have position on the big stacks. So in this case, say the villain in co keeps raising, when we 3-bet, short stack is going to shove only small range so we don't have to worry about short stack, where as if we are in seat A, we don't have as good position and don't make as much mulah $$$. I would obviously prefer to have a nit with a full stack to my left rather than short stack but if there is a fish to my right, then I really don't mind the short stack to my left, if short stack catches on to me stealing, I can tighten up a tad bit and just steal less while making a profit off the fish to my right.
 
Seat A and it's not even close. You want 2 s/s on your left? Seriously, they inhibit your stealing for all your late position raises. I could possibly cope with 1 nit s/s, but having 2 of them shoving is gonna be horrible. Yeah there are a lot of s/s that are nits, but there's also quite a few who know that your stealing with a wide range, and will shove accordingly.

I would rather have fullish stacks, so if they 3bet me I still have a choice to play position with them. With a s/s you don't have any post flop choices whatsoever.
 
the logic you A guys are using is bizarro though imo

so you'd rather be playing pots out of position 100 BBs deep than having a simple call or fold decision when the shortstack shoves on you? because that's the alternative. plus shortstacks play less hands, so you'd probably have more hands where you're playing deep OOP than you'll have hands where you're getting shoved on. add to that the fact that you don't have good position on anyone with a full stack, and that sucks for a good player
 
Jagsti said:
Seat A and it's not even close. You want 2 s/s on your left? Seriously, they inhibit your stealing for all your late position raises. I could possibly cope with 1 nit s/s, but having 2 of them shoving is gonna be horrible. Yeah there are a lot of s/s that are nits, but there's also quite a few who know that your stealing with a wide range, and will shove accordingly.

I would rather have fullish stacks, so if they 3bet me I still have a choice to play position with them. With a s/s you don't have any post flop choices whatsoever.
Click to expand...

I have yet to meet a shortstack who knows how to play anything other than QQ+ and AK tbh at 25nl and below. Maybe once or twice, but they are heavily outnumbered by the nits imo.
 
Back
Top