[DCJ311]

The important gist of Gigabet's post is simply taking advantage of stack sizes relative to your stack size and position at the table.

I have no disputes that you would like small(ish) stacks on your left, as your allins against them will be 'no brainers'. You won't have to worry about the possibility of a re-steal where they take advantage of their position. Simple.

And obviously, you want bigger stacks on your right, since they don't have allin equity against you, while you have re-steal/position equity on them.

The basic bullet point is: Eliminate short stacks that are attacking your stack, or are feeding the certain medium or short stacks stacks on your right that are a threat to you.

I have no dispute with this logic.

However, I think it's absurd to put your stack in constant -cEV jeopardy to set this situation up, since the conductor has little power over what the orchestra members do, so to speak. Once the situation is set up, you will be lucky if this type of format will retain itself for more than a round of hands.

If one is FORTUNATE enough to walk into this type of situation Gigabet has tried to set up, it should be extremely profitable. Whether or not it can be set up without taking enormous -EV risks and also be expected to sustain itself for a long enough interval for the big stack to profit from is something I am highly skeptical of.