observing two villians

[Chris Daddy Cool]

you are ready to sit down and play in a 10/20 6max game online and you notice this hand between two unknown opponents.

P1 limps utg+1. P2 raises on the button. blinds fold. HU.

flop: 3 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]J [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]4 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

P1 checks. P2 bets. P1 calls.

turn: 4 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

P1 checks. P2 bets. P1 raises. P2 3-bets. P1 calls.

river: K [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

P1 checks. P2 bets. P1 calls.

P1 shows 22. P2 shows A [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]K [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

what would you put on your notes for each player? and if you had your choice would you rather sit before P1, in between P1 and P2, or after P2?

[Keepitsimple]

I would probably want to sit after P1.

My notes would be:

P1 never folds
P2 overplays hands

[five]

[ QUOTE ]
I would probably want to sit after P1.

My notes would be:

P1 never folds
P2 overplays OC

[/ QUOTE ]

[Zele]

They both do something I've seen a lot more often lately, which is weird bets which are neither value bets or bluffs, but that combine the worst aspects of both.

I guess we could explain P2's turn 3bet as a very bold (stupid) FSD play, so I'd make a note to watch him for those. I'd assume I have an edge vs. P2, but nothing I've seen makes me want to buddy list him. P1's turn CR is super-delicious action I'd want a part of, so I choose to take a seat in between P1 and P2 to try to isolate him and pretty much to try to get him to do the same thing to me. My initial note would be that he overplays crap value.

[admiralfluff]

P1: wait t turn, c/r weak v. pfr
P2: 3bet turn c/r UI AK HU

(why not be specific?)

I sit between.

[milesdyson]

"what would you put on your notes for each player?"

P1: WOW c/c c/r 22 J434 vs pfr
P2: WOW 3bet c/c c/r on J434 w AK

"and if you had your choice would you rather sit before P1, in between P1 and P2, or after P2?"

what? are they both at the table in both of these situations? if so, sitting immediately after both of these guys has to be waaaaaay better than the other two choices.

[DeathDonkey]

P1: straightforward, don't bluff
P2: (probably wouldn't put anything)
I'd sit between or after but not before P1 if I could help it.

From just this hand P2 might be awesome and he might be a total spew, I'd reserve judgment.

-DeathDonkey

[StellarWind]

The hijack limp with 22 is a definite sign of a weak player.

The postflop battle won't make sense until I see more hands. P2 may have thought he was a clear favorite to have the best hand when he 3-bet the turn and for all I know he was quite correct. Or P2 could be a complete LAG idiot. You can't tell without a read on P1.

It's equally possible that P1 played perfectly. If P2 is a typical maniac then I like P1's play a lot.

[ QUOTE ]
and if you had your choice would you rather sit before P1, in between P1 and P2, or after P2?

[/ QUOTE ]
I realize that opportunities for U.S. players aren't what they used to be, but they aren't as limited as that. I want a definite objective before I sit at a table and this doesn't qualify. I'll keep looking until I find a table where I actually know who the fish is.

My basic seating rules are:

1. Sit behind the big fish.

2. Keep wild or aggressive players in front of me where I can see them.

3. Sit behind the big fish.

4. It's nice to sit directly in front of a passive player.

5. Sit behind the big fish.

My best guess is that I should sit behind P2. This seems to best satisfy #2 and it may well satisfy all the other rules too. The in-between seat could be awesome (P1 a whale) or just awful (P1 a good player and P2 a maniac). The seat in front of P1 might be good too if there is a bad player on the far side of the table. Sitting behind the unknown bad player, in front of P1 who open-limped, and far away from a dangerous P2 could be just right.

But this is all speculation. The correct approach to OP's problem is to realize that you know virtually nothing and act accordingly.