Player seating vs a looser table

[jackfrost]

I have two senarios and i'm curious which you find to be more profitable. Both games are limit holdem with ten players.

The first table you have two loose passive players to your left and one to your right. The remaining players are a mix of tight passive and tight aggressive.

The second table there are five loose passive players but the two players to your left and right are a mixture of tight passive and tight aggressive.

[emonrad87]

It depends on where the TAG is in the second scenario. You want the easily predicted players (the rocks) on your left. You usually know exactly what they're gonna do. The next best to your right would be the loose-passives. Passive on left is good beacause they won't raise behind you very often. You want the aggressives on your right. That way you will have many oppurtunities to face the field with calling two bets.

[jackfrost]

Thats not exactly what I was looking for but I do appreciate the reply.

I'm not sure which book i was reading, maybe Harrington on hold'em or Supersytem2 but somebody said that you need to pay even closer attention to the 2 players to your left and one to the right because you would be playing a lot more pots with these people. I'm curious how much more profitable it is to have the loose passives right next to you.

[emonrad87]

Sklansky's theory of poker gives an excellent discussion of position. It's unclear exactly how much more you make from great table position. But without the fear of a raise behind you, you can definately play a lot differnetly from when you do fear tricky play behind you.

[jackfrost]

I was looking something up and came across Caro's MCU tip#13 - Sit to the left of loose players. He says "sit to the left of players who either pose the biggest threat or who supply the most money."
I guess having a couple loose players to my right will detour me from changing to a table with a larger number of loose players.