Pick a Seat

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.JPG (http://www.cardschat.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=17716&d=1234924329)

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.

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.

I like B, able to put pressure on the short stacks blinds.

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.

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.

Seat B and its not close.

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.

Chips move clockwise, I want a big stack to my right and a ss I can steal over on my left.

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

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.

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.

Yes I know WV.

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

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.

ok ill read up on all the long posts tomorrow im too tired atm.
night guys

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

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.

But is the amount of money you make from stealing even close to the amount you can win from having position on players with 100bb stacks?

And even if you get 3-bet on a steal or get shoved on its about the easiest decision making you can have... Call or Fold. Don't have to think about a plan for the rest of the hand or analyze too many boards. And even if you make a mistake OOP against these guys it's costing you a lot less than when you make that same mistake with a 100bb guy sitting on your left.

B seat for me, SS will be easyer to play against, and I will have more info on the Big stacks.

I would take seat B. I prefer to sit right behind the money so I can pay more attention to what it is doing... Hopefully moving one seat to the left.

A for me, SS and even shorter stack on my right. I'll play the full stacks appropriately. Personal preference!!

i haven't seen a good response to this yet from any of the A supporters

Here is Paul Wasicka's explanation of a short stacker (which is what I figured WV was talking about.)

"Basically, short stackers are players looking to flip a slightly weighted coin. Their whole game consists of getting all the money in preflop. Their basic strategy is to sit down with around one-fifth of the maximum buy in, wait till they have a decent hand and there's some money in the pot, and then shove in their stack."

First, to me that sounds like aggression, yeah I'm sure most of the time they are nits with their hand selection, but there is no playing against that, it's constant races on a coinflip. And from everything I've ever learned, you want aggressive players on your right. People mention you can steal their blinds easy if they're on the left, but, as that is good, it matters more in tourneys when the blinds are huge and ante's are involved. In a cash game thats all your gonna be taking is their small puny blinds because if they are playing its usually for their whole stack, so your not gonna be pushing them off anything. (A) to me is the right choice, cause you have position on the ss, and do you want to keep putting a quarter to a fifth of you stack on the line when you raise, then have the ss's go all in...really.

I'd rather just take a different table althogether, this one doesn't seem too great

Sorry playing a session right now and all I have time for is dumb posts like my last one and this, but I'll respond to this in a few minutes when all my tables close.

just seems as if some of you are acting like shortstacks magically get dealt better hands than regular players. they don't. so what, they'll shove on you sometimes. often you're going to be able to make very profitable calls against their range. you do have to adjust what you're opening a bit depending on how much they're shoving on you, but really, a typical shortstackers 3bet % is usually not going to be more than 7-8%, often it's more like 5%

i don't see how being out of position vs. the money can be better than having position on the money, as long as you're playing better than your opponents and adjusting well