Position is Overrated

[jwg152]

I know that all of the poker books claim that position is so important. But after years of playing, I'm fairly sure this assertion is incorrect. My thesis is that as much as a player could use late position against their opponents; their opponents can use their early position against the late position raiser.

A few scenarios:

1. If a player in late position raises, and 2 players call, if one of those earlier position players hit their hand hard, they will check knowing that most often the late raiser will bet.

2. Many players will limp in EP with KK and AA and look for a steal from late position so they can come back over the top or trap them on the flop. But more generally, even if no player limps in with a monster, any raise from the button is treated with great skepticism, and will get play regardless.

My aforementioned conclusion is not based solely on these two scenarios.

I would appreciate some comments on position.

[La Brujita]

The more I play the more I realize how crucial position is.

Look at how hard it is to play drawing hands out of positions, look at how you can use your opponents actions to your advantage late, the list could go on and on.

Do you really think position is not important? And, I really mean no offense, are you a winning player?

[jwg152]

In response to your last question. Yes, I am an extremely successful player.

I think by your response, you are an intermediate level player. I NEVER said that there were not situations where late position was extremely helpful - there are many. My point is that there are countless ways to exploit that advantage. Do you know the story of the seagull and the clam????

[Jason Strasser]

Ok, let me answer this post in a fair way.

There are *TIMES* when you'd like to be acting first. However, position is the single most important thing in no limit poker. Because of the nature of no limit, most hands are played heads up, especially in tournaments. And chances are, a good percentage of the time, both players will miss a flop. Position has the ultimate advantage. If the person to act first makes a weak bet, position can raise. If the person acting first suspiciously checks, position can check behind. If the person acting first checks, the person with position can buy the pot.

It is the ultimate advantage to have position on someone. Dumb players use position to try to buy every pot, in which case a person in early position can slow play to their hearts desire. However, a competent poker player does not auto-bet in position, otherwise smart players around him will adjust and abuse him.

The fact that this needs to be explained to you means you need to read some books or something... You sound silly and uneducated (poker wise).

[La Brujita]

[ QUOTE ]
In response to your last question. Yes, I am an extremely successful player.

I think by your response, you are an intermediate level player. I NEVER said that there were not situations where late position was extremely helpful - there are many. My point is that there are countless ways to exploit that advantage. Do you know the story of the seagull and the clam????

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know the story but I know you are a bit full of yourself if you think you can even guess what level I play at based on a one minute response. I am normally pretty nice but your response ticked me off.

My response to you is piss off.

[Ash, Housewares]

"Are all men from the future loud-mouthed braggarts?"

"Nope, just me baby.... just me."

[fnurt]

There are definitely times when it is an advantage to act first, if you are an aggressive player. When both players miss the flop, the first one to get his money in the middle often wins.

However, position is still an advantage overall. Let me comment on your two specific observations. As to the first, it is true that people tend to "check to the raiser" on the flop, at both limit and no-limit; however, this is a tendency that good players often exploit. For example, you hold AJ on the button and raise after several players limp. If you get the hand heads up, you will probably play aggressively after the flop; if you get a lot of callers, however, and the flop misses you, you will likely just take the free card when they all check to you. If that card makes your hand, the combination of position and your pre-flop raise just bought you a nice pot.

It is just a fallacy that early position players have an advantage because they can check-raise. If you are on the button, you get to act after everyone else does; if you are first to act and check, you get to act after everyone else does, with the caveat that if everyone else checks, you don't get to act after all. The check-raise is a tool that helps you make up for bad position; but in almost all cases, you would rather just have the good position in the first place. Early position is only an advantage, as explained above, when being the first to bet helps you buy the pot.

As to your second point, it is true that the EP raiser gets more respect, and sometimes you can use this to your benefit, but think about the REASON why he gets so much respect. It is because it is much more dangerous to raise with so many people left to act, therefore you are less likely to do it without a real hand. While you can take advantage of this belief to employ deception, the danger is still real.

If you hold KK on the button, yes, that early-position limper might be trapping you with AA, and there always might be an AA lurking in the blinds. But if you hold KK in early position, anyone at all might hold AA! You have the unenviable choice of limping, which you will regret if no one raises and you let a bunch of people in cheap, or raising it up and hoping the AA isn't out there.

In all cases, you get more information by being in late position. The fact that sophisticated people use deception from early position, and you can't trust the information 100%, doesn't change the fact that you're still better off than the guy in early position with no information at all.

[TheGrifter]

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're joking.

[B Dids]

When I first played I didn't buy into position much either. Once I got more figured out, and starting really thinking about when to limp, when to raise, and when to fold the importance of position really hit me.

I'll second the players who are saying that if you don't understand the importance of position, you aren't understanding some really important elements of the game. I know that when I thought like you did, I didn't.

[jwg152]

Let me respond this way... first to the one who advised me to piss off, you started the ad hominems pal, not me.

Second, to Mr. Strasser, I knew this post would be misunderstood by Sklansky disciples. (chuckle) And I posted it because I knew it would meet responses like the one you and the other "gent" posted. I very well understand contempoaray thinking on the matter, as I'm sure you do as well as evidenced by your reguritation of modern text on the matter.

My ONLY point is that there are many schemes to neutralize an opponent armed with better position. I am not stating that position is irrelevant, just overrated.

[shandrakor]

But always assuming that late position is better is the wrong way to think of position. The importance of position is not to want to always be last, but to always be *aware* of your position, how you can use it to your advantage, and how other people's positions give them advantages over you.

[jwg152]

Shandrakor - Very Good Post...

[fnurt]

"Overrated" is one of those words that doesn't really mean much. Maybe position is overrated by some people, but I also think you are overrating the techniques that are used to neutralize position. I don't think you can ever truly neutralize the importance of position; you can just make it count for less.

I'll go so far as to say that except in the sole case I mentioned, where the first person to bet steals the pot because everyone missed, it is always an advantage to have better position. How much of an advantage? We could argue about that all day.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
There are definitely times when it is an advantage to act first, if you are an aggressive player. When both players miss the flop, the first one to get his money in the middle often wins.


[/ QUOTE ]

On this point especially, I agree with the OP. Considering how often this is the case, I think it is an effect which is not to be underestimated.

eastbay

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
Second, to Mr. Strasser, I knew this post would be misunderstood by Sklansky disciples. (chuckle) And I posted it because I knew it would meet responses like the one you and the other "gent" posted. I very well understand contempoaray thinking on the matter, as I'm sure you do as well as evidenced by your reguritation of modern text on the matter

[/ QUOTE ]

I eagerly await your book on "post-modern poker theory"

[Michael Davis]

You are failing to recognize the near unbelievable poker accomplishments of the OP.

-Michael

[Myrtle]

Geez, Guys…..

……….Kind of reminds me of a situation many moons ago when a good friend and his significant other got into a major beef. It ended when he said something like….

“You are the most important thing in my life, but you are not the ONLY thing in my life….sometimes other things come first”………

Position is kind of like that, methinks…..

MOST of the time having position (LATE) is an advantage. There are a few times when EP, under certain specific circumstances, will be advantageous over LP.

The debate/discussion here should be……………..

What are those circumstances?

[Kenshin]

[ QUOTE ]
Geez, Guys…..

……….Kind of reminds me of a situation many moons ago when a good friend and his significant other got into a major beef. It ended when he said something like….

“You are the most important thing in my life, but you are not the ONLY thing in my life….sometimes other things come first”………

Position is kind of like that, methinks…..

MOST of the time having position (LATE) is an advantage. There are a few times when EP, under certain specific circumstances, will be advantageous over LP.

The debate/discussion here should be……………..

What are those circumstances?

[/ QUOTE ]

So you are in effect saying that poker constitutes a dynamic game, one in which hard and fast rules rarely apply?

I am shocked,shocked to find that gambling is going on in here..... Your winnings, sir

Kenshin

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]

So you are in effect saying that poker constitutes a dynamic game, one in which hard and fast rules rarely apply?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummm.....Ahhhh.....Hmmmm....I...AH...guess..."It all depends"??!!

[ QUOTE ]
I am shocked,shocked to find that gambling is going on in here..... Your winnings, sir

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL...how about "Shocked and Chagrined"??


/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Bigwig]

One advantage of early position is to be able to 'check to the raiser' when you do hit your flop. I've found in many no limit tourney's that you've got about three bets until you are all-in. Say you call a raise by the button in the big blind with a solid hand and you hit it big. If you check to the raiser and he bets, and you reraise, it's about all-in time, and a big win for you.

[salty]

I applaud your bravery in posting this question it is worthy of discussion.

What I get from your original post is an argument that validates the importance of knowing how to use position not the irrelevance of it.

In scenario 1 EP checks knowing that LPs position may require him to bet or over bet the pot,he may also choose to play back at the LP raiser.It is also possible that EP does not understand position and has limped a hand that requires raising.I saw an example of this last night,2 EP limpers sb and BB see the flop,TTx,checked around,x checked around,K checked around.EP takes the pot with AK,She then tells the guy beside her that she hates AK and only knows one person who really knows how to play it.

In scenario 2 EP is using position to trap which is a risky but rewarding move and LP is getting suckered into using position,but both understand it and are trying to use it to their benefit.

The bottom line here really is that knowing how to use position is a huge edge over those who dont.

[45Player]

[ QUOTE ]
give me position and I'll beat any game without even looking at my cards

[/ QUOTE ]

I was going to write a more considered response, but sometimes less is more.

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
One advantage of early position is to be able to 'check to the raiser' when you do hit your flop. I've found in many no limit tourney's that you've got about three bets until you are all-in. Say you call a raise by the button in the big blind with a solid hand and you hit it big. If you check to the raiser and he bets, and you reraise, it's about all-in time, and a big win for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the fallacy I referenced above. Checking to the raiser and then check-raising him is the exact same thing as having position on him and raising when he bets. The difference is that in the first case, you can't be 100% sure of his action; in the second case, you are 100% sure, because he has already acted when it comes to you.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Not only that, but the OP obviously missed many of the details on position that stress that position is most important when you're in a pot with 2 or 3 opponents. Heads-up, it's often advantageous to act first, and with more than 3 opponents, the impact of factors other than who has the best hand gets minimized.

[PlayerA]

One thing to note is that a check-raise will often get more respect than raise from LP. So, it's not quite the same thing.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
give me position and I'll beat any game without even looking at my cards

[/ QUOTE ]

I was going to write a more considered response, but sometimes less is more.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doyle also said poker is full of the most honorable and honest people. Doyle is a little off sometimes.

eastbay

[TheGrifter]

Okay, since you obviously aren't joking. Position is important in Limit Texas Hold 'Em. Position is everything in NL Texas Hold 'Em.

The basic positional advantage that you have is information. You get to see your opponents actions before you must act.

The importance of position is so basic and fundamental and obvious that it does not lend itself well to debate. If you haven't done so yet pick up the Theory of Poker. Sure there are methods to partially neutralize positional advantage but these exist because it is such a large advantage in the first place.

[45Player]

[ QUOTE ]
Doyle also said poker is full of the most honorable and honest people. Doyle is a little off sometimes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe sometimes, but not this time.

Greg Raymer will begin today in the final 32 with 4 very big stacks immediately to his left.
Are you trying to tell me that his position is not going to play a huge part in his strategy ?
I bet he can't wait for the seat redraw.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Doyle also said poker is full of the most honorable and honest people. Doyle is a little off sometimes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe sometimes, but not this time.

Greg Raymer will begin today in the final 32 with 4 very big stacks immediately to his left.
Are you trying to tell me that his position is not going to play a huge part in his strategy ?
I bet he can't wait for the seat redraw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course it does. It just isn't everything and may in fact work to his major advantage on some hands.

I think there's a misinterpretation here of the OP. I think he meant that "later position is not always better" rather than "position is not important." Big difference.

People talk about "having position" it always means later position. It doesn't mean having the best position whether it be later or earlier. That's what's "overrated" about it.

eastbay

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Greg Raymer will begin today in the final 32 with 4 very big stacks immediately to his left.
Are you trying to tell me that his position is not going to play a huge part in his strategy ?
I bet he can't wait for the seat redraw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course it does. It just isn't everything and may in fact work to his major advantage on some hands.

I think there's a misinterpretation here of the OP. I think he meant that "later position is not always better" rather than "position is not important." Big difference.

People talk about "having position" it always means later position. It doesn't mean having the best position whether it be later or earlier. That's what's "overrated" about it.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

Our friend eastbay hit the nail on the head here. You're actually talking about two different types of position - position relative to the big stacks, as opposed to position relative to the people playing a particular hand.

If Greg gets into a confrontation with one of the big stacks to his left, he will be at a disadvantage because of inferior position, we all know that. Of course we assume he is trying to avoid getting into too many of those confrontations.

Here's how stack position works to Greg's advantage today. We know he wants to bully the short stacks, which happen to be to his right. As luck would have it, he is the first one who gets a chance to bully - meaning that if one of the short stacks enters a pot, Greg has the first chance to raise and isolate, or otherwise bully. Unless one of the other big stacks has a monster hand, they're going to be reluctant to get involved in this tussle, leaving Greg unmolested to do his work. They'll just bide their time for when a short stack gets into the pot and Greg decides to pass.

Remember, Greg doesn't want to tangle with the big stacks, but they want to tangle with him even less. As long as he is entering hands as an aggressor, which we assume he will since he knows how to play a big stack, it's going to take a big hand for one of the people to his left to take him on.

So there's an example of how position is not as straightforward as you might think. Of course, I still maintain it's a totally different kind of 'position' than what this thread was originally talking about.

[45Player]

Eastbay

You're determined to have the last word, so you can have it.

Yes, Greg's position may work to his advantage in some hands. But most of the time he will just be folding because of the big stacks on his left. So for many of his hands, his position will be the determining factor in the play of his hand.
Yes, I agree "later position is not always better". It's not hard to come up with examples where being in late position puts you at a disadvantage.

If someone wishes to argue with me that position is overrated then I fold. I've wasted enough time on this already.
Geez, I could have spent that time dreaming that I was the chip leader in the WSOP going into the second last day !
Go Greg !

[BettnTibetn]

i think your thesis is totally wrong...position is so in NL hold em. Most people have brought up the key ideas but i hand like A10 UTG is really hard to play. However after 5 folds in front of you the odds of a better hand being out there are lower. If position is ignored you are going to get hammered in the long run. a hand like QJ isn't playable in first postion but is nice on the button

[45Player]

I think you're simplfying Greg's task a bit here. Dan Harrington and the other big stacks are not going to just let Greg bully the short stacks. If he appears to be doing that, one or more of them will start reraising. It will be phychological warfare. That's why it's such a beautiful game !
Anyway, I do take your point about this being a totally different kind of 'position' than what this thread was originally talking about. But I think it still needed to be said - the OP's original assertion 'position is overrated' was a bit irritating. By the way, I agree with your other posts on this thread.

[soxfan70]

What dos this Brunson guy know anyway? JWG152 says he's wrong!!

[waynethetrain]

I've done a number of studies on specific hands in varying positions using TTH. The results clearly indicated that position matters, but I concluded that it might be slightly overrated also.

There are some hands that are not profitable overall and certainly not profitable from early position that many experts recommend be played in late position in a called but unraised pot. I find they are also losers in late position also against similar caliber opposition. That leads me to believe that position was overrated in the original analysis that lead to the recommendation.

There are hands that are small winners overall that are NOT recommended for play in early position by experts that ARE also winners in early position against similar opposition. Again that leads me to believe position was overrated.

I think by far the most important factor in winning poker is choosing opponents that are weaker than you.

If you can do that, there's a long list of hands that are playable from any position that experts would recommend you NOT play from certain positions.

If you can't do that, there's along list of hands that come highly recommended from experts as playable from certain positions that will leak you to death.

[waynethetrain]

>Most people have brought up the key ideas but i hand like A10 UTG is really hard to play.<

Funny you should bring this one up. ATo is a winner from early position against evenly matched opposition at a variety of skill levels even though most experts say you shouldn't be playing it. If you are better than your opponents and you are passing on ATo from early position, you are giving money away.

[Michael Davis]

There is absolutely no way this is true.

-Michael

[Michael Davis]

You cannot play ATo in early position merely because it is profitable in TTH. Those players do not react to situations like normal human beings.

-Michael

Buy PokerTracker and put in thousands of hands on Party Poker. Play ATo and other hands from early position in the softest low limit games you can find.

[AceKQJT]

I would say that A-T is [ QUOTE ]
a winner from early position against evenly matched opposition at a variety of skill levels

[/ QUOTE ] as long as you do not have to make ANY post-flop descision. Otherwise, the guy holding A-T on the button will beat your A-T more than you beat his.

--Casey

[bunky9590]

Position is key to NL, table position as in the button, but more important is position relative to the raiser.

I don't make ANY decisions on the table without regard to both of those positions as well as the action that occurred.

[waynethetrain]

>as long as you do not have to make ANY post-flop descision. Otherwise, the guy holding A-T on the button will beat your A-T more than you beat his.<

I was not suggesting ATo vs ATo.

I was suggesting that if you give me ATo in early position vs. 9 players of exactly my playing ability that are holding 9 random hands I will show a small profit with it if I play it. If the other 9 players are superior to me, I will lose money with it. It's close, but it is profitable.

[waynethetrain]

I understand that TTH is not exactly like playing against humans, but I have runs millions of simulations with a variety of player strengths (and teaked their decision making). As long as the player playing ATo from early position is not the fish at the table, he will win with it (marginally).

When I go into a game at Party and feel that I am one of the better players in the game (post flop play) - which I would otherwise I'd leave - I am fairly certain I will win with it over the long haul even though most experts say to fold it.

I believe there are MANY situations in which much better players than myself fold hands they could be winning with because they do not give their own post flop playing enough credit for being able to turn a marginal hand into a long term winner when they are on a weak table.

[spazm6666]

Read a bunch of these posts and a bit new to the game, mayeb a year and a half in taking it semi seriously and I have already learned how important position is in tournaments. It is not an absolute as the other players can often dictate whether you want to act before or after them, but in a big tourney where you need to occassioanlly take a few pots just to keep momentum and have chips, using position to steal chips/blinds is KEY. If you disagree, then i must agree with previous posters. Piss off.