Author Topic: Traditional vs. Progressive (?) when balancing tables  (Read 3683 times)

EvilWeenie

  • Guest
Traditional vs. Progressive (?) when balancing tables
« on: June 28, 2012, 07:19:24 PM »
The whole discussion of Traditional vs. Progressive TD ideology is a new concept to me.  I wasn't aware that there were multiple schools of thought, but it doesn't come as much of a surprise.  My question today is whether there's any merit to moving a player from the most similar position to the next open seat as opposed to blindly (pun somewhat intended) moving the next BB to the worst seat on the new table.
Sometimes the worst seat on the new table is right behind the button and the player who was UTG is now in the cutoff and not anywhere close to being the next BB.  Sometimes the dealer has already dealt the next hand and the next BB is involved in a hand.  In that instance I tend to take the first to fold. 
Either way, my thought is that the seat that a player is being moved to should be similar to the one being vacated.
What's the consensus from the real world?

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3345
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Traditional vs. Progressive (?) when balancing tables
« Reply #1 on: June 28, 2012, 07:51:12 PM »
EvilWeenie,
 
 I think you are on the right track if you follow your own brief statement: Move the next BB to the worst seat at the new table. That's it! If it happens to be the BB, perfect! If the only open seat is the SB or the button, I suggest they wait until the button passes.

diz475

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 48
Re: Traditional vs. Progressive (?) when balancing tables
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2012, 06:00:01 AM »
trying to move players position for position in button games can be a real pain because while your trying to find the table to move the player from the position is changing on the table you are moving him to

EvilWeenie

  • Guest
Re: Traditional vs. Progressive (?) when balancing tables
« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2012, 07:45:34 AM »
diz,
I see what you're saying in a large field, but I'm usually in a position where I only have a handful tables to contend with.