EP vs MP

[fishbutt]

Obviously late position is better than EP and MP. However, I'm curious about whether MP is always better than EP. Specifically, the reason I ask this is because it is much riskier to check-raise in MP as compared to EP. The good thing EP has going for it is the power of the check-raise. Although when in MP, you make a more informed decision (with more people acting in front of you), you don't really have the ability to check-raise. So I would argue that sometimes it is better to act earlier rather than in MP. Is this the case or can someone explain why it is always better to act as late as possible?

[jesse8888]

There is a pretty good discussion of this in SSHE. I don't have it with me to quote for you, but you should check it out.

[Fnord]

MP because players acting after I raise tend to tighten up unless there are limpers in front of me.

[Hyperrrprank]

There are a few advantages to EP, the biggest of which is the chance to checkraise a late position bet and face the field with 2 cold or checkraise an MP bet to pad the pot.

This doesn't balance out the advantage of acting later though. Acting later is virtually always a big benefit, it lets you lose less when behind and win more when ahead in almost every situation. The hands that you want to checkraise rather than bet out only come along once in a while, and even then sometimes the play doesn't work.

[numbnuts007]

maybe utg is about equal to utg+1 because of the added benefit of the c/r or being able to bluff first, that's about it though. any mp is better.