player types who should be on your left/right

I think there is broad agreement that you should have LOOSE-AGGRESSIVE ones on your right so that you can isolate them, and I think it´s also fairly obvious that you should have TIGHT-AGGRESSIVE ones on your right so that you can better avoid confrontation with them.


But what about the other two types, LOOSE-PASSIVE and TIGHT-PASSIVE, is it better to have them on your right or on your left and why?

This question has always seemed silly to me. You always want everyone to your right for the same reason that you want to be in last position. So if a floorman ever asks me where I want him to seat everyone, I'll say "put everyone one seat to my right."


The only time the question is relevant is if you have a chance to change seats or choose seats in order to put a particular player to your right. I think this is probably worthwhile if a particular player is very aggressive or tricky. Passive players don't matter to you because they won't take any of your money with position plays.


The only thing that matters is the relative position of the single best/most aggressive/trickiest player at the table. Other than that it doesn't matter.


Craig H.

Craig H.,


Passive players do indeed matter very much. It is important whether they are tight passive or loose passive. In general, you want these players on your left, precisely because they will not make position plays on you. But you must note that a loose-passive will often call your bets, attracting "big pot" or "legitimate odds" overcalls from behind.


Mike

In order for it to make a difference at all, the loose passive player would have to be seated to the left of the most aggressive player at the table, and then a seat would have to open up in between them. Also, this player would have to be the loosest, most passive player at the table or else you would be giving up optimal position relative to someone else.


That's why this discussion is pointless. There are going to be 8 or 9 other players at the table, all of which can be classified in some manner as either aggressive, passive, etc. Furthermore, the player you describe as being helpful in building big pots will serve this function from any position. If he is to your right he will have already called and will be willing to call your raise. The rest of the table will know this too, and the pots will grow. It is only important to know what the tricky/aggressive guy or girl is going to do.


Realistically, most of the time you should simply take the open seat and play solid poker from that seat. I can count on one hand the number of times I've seen a known winning player change seats in a full game.


Craig H.

You question is indeed very important. While I agree that passive players (PPs)should be on your left and tight agressive players (TAPs) on your right, I do not necessarily agree that loose-agressive players (LAPs) should be on your right. Some have written that a LAP should be either immediately to your left or across the table from you. Here's why:


While having the LAP on your right may help you to isolate the player, often your attempts meet with failure, because other players know what you are trying to do and will often call. Second, having the LAP on your left is more akin to being in late position. You get to see whether you will be able to isolate the LAP, whether you can build a big pot when you have a good hand, or whether you should let the LAP do the betting reserving the right to check-raise. In other words, there are more opportunity for strategic plays against the entire table when the LAP is to your left, whereas when he is to your right you can only attempt to isolate him or become a calling station.


For more discussion, see Carson, The Complete Book of Hold-em Poker.

i do it all the time... i prefer the 2,3,8,9 seats at a hold'em table... and if i can get these seats, i do. UNLESS i see a more profitable seat, i.e. directly to the right of the most aggressive/solid player in the game. if there is really nobody that stands out at the table that i want position on that bad, then i will try to get one of the end seats. but i have moved TABLES and SEATS just to get into position behind a player. i do it all the time, about 40% of my sessions i move for position reasons, about 40% i move because i like the end seats. the other 10% i don't move because i'm already where i want to be, or i can't get the seat i want.

this is true, however, in the situation you described, where someone else will call you isolation raises because they know what you are up to, they are still paying to fraw along with you, and you should be making isolation raises with hands that should make people behind you pay as well. also, having the LAP on your right does build bigger pot, but also traps more opponents into calling, and therefore sucking on you. this all creates for higher variance. it's not an incorrect strategy, but i think it's one you'll be able to employ less completely and frequently.

is there any argument to be made for having tight aggressive players on your left? for instance, the fact that you know they can fold a hand to a (your) raise?