|
littleogre
|
02-16-2006, 02:10 PM
Post subject: Ok these isn't a i really know how to play question.
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,344
|
|
Rather it is i really need help as i don't encounter this situation often and thus i don't have a counter strategy for it. I know how to play 1 maniac but how on earth do you play when there are 3 or more at the table? I mean any 2 cards i want to see the flop with i am forced to pay the maximum. After the flop between maniac a b and c they cap every street making it really expensive to play any hand. Between the 2 of them they make It impossible to control the size of the pot. So if you just don't want to read all the above here is the question point blank and str8 from the hip. How do you play when you know the hand will probably be capped on every street? Lastly on top of the maniacs we also have the typical calling station in the hand so every pot has 3 or 4 people seeing the river and caping it all the way.
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
euphoricism
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Your place or my place
Posts: 3,610
|
|
Generally, just find another table. While there is a lot of profit to be had there, there is a lot of loss to take as well. No reason to fight 'em, always somewhere with greener pastures.
|
|
|
|
sinky
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: SCOTLAND
Posts: 295
|
|
don't bluff
|
|
|
|
dj newman
|
|
Straight
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 210
|
|
I think the right strategy is to play all premium cards, PP and suited connectors....maybe even one-gappers. The Implied odds are so huge, and then reavaluate after the flop.
|
|
|
|
littleogre
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,344
|
|
Ok here is a more specefic question. Lets say you have pocket 9s against one maniac and you raise and they reraise. you call as they could literally have any 2 cards. Now post flop unless the board is really scary it is probably ok to call them down or if you luck up and hit a set you can probably win a mega large pot. Now same situation with 2 maniacs suddenly my above tactic gets shot down really quick. As it is gona cost me a heck of a lot more to see the river. Personally i tightened my play up but due to bad flops for me that didn't work in the short term.
In One hand i floped a Q high str8. Me and 2 maniacs capped every street sadly for me this same dude that was caping all day ever day had a king high str8 Another hand i had pocket As manic rivers trip 7. Basically all my profit off the last couple days was wiped out in just a few hours. One thing that i was doing before i decided to play super tight was calling 2 and 3 bets with hands like q/10 suited now normally i would never do such a thing as i feel thats way to loose. My thinking was i could win a huge pot when i hit a big hand. Perhaps i was thinking about things in the wring way.
|
|
|
|
silverfist
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 341
|
|
In cases like this, you need to reevaluate your odds to continue with a hand. Probably you'll want to stay away from gutshots, overcards and the like if there's someone to act behind you, since you'll be paying four bets to go on. It's fine to stay in there on the flop with an OESD or flush draw. Otherwise, get out of there unless you can stop the betting.
Remember also that your implied odds go way up in cases like this. If you hit that straight, you are going to get paid off, big time. If you can stop the betting with a weak draw (like a gutshot or a couple of backdoors), then go on with it. Also, before the flop, mix it up with your suited connectors and any pocket pairs, even if you need to call two or even three bets. Sure, you're paying a ton to play, but they're easy to dump on the flop if you miss and you'll get paid huge if you hit. In pots with maniacs, you're paying 1.5-2 BBs to play and can easily get paid off 20 BBs if you hit.
Ultra aggession by multiple players is a huge leak for them, so I'd try to take advantage of it. My suggestion would be:
1) Pay more preflop with speculative hands (SCs and PPs)
2) Don't chase longshot draws unless you can stop the betting.
3) Chase even more longshot draws if you can stop the betting.
4) Never bluff.
5) Value bet to death when you think you're ahead, which you often will be in cases like this with an overpair or TPTK.
Tables like this can be quite profitable, if you make the right adjustments. Your swings will be much greater, though, so be ready for it.
|
Discuss Plato, Aristotle and Aquinas at The Lyceum
|
|
chardrian
|
|
I rarely,if ever, get pms
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 4,524
|
|
I love tables like this - it's raise/fold poker. Just tighten up - play good hands preflop and flop - i.e. be willing to cap flops with AQ on raggedy boards. If you haven't hit anything really worth chasing (i.e. your AQ gives you only 6 outs at best) by the turn you fold. Lots and lots and lots of money to be won. The "find a better table" is really bad advice I think.
|
|
|
|
Xanadu
|
|
Full House
Join Date: May 2005
Location: st. paul, MO
Posts: 966
|
|
I'm with chardrian ... it's hard to find a better table than this. The only thing to make it better is to have more people calling down to the river. There are a few things that are important to remember when you set out to destroy such a table.
With each street nearly always capped with about the same number of people in the hand, you have nearly complete information on your pot and implied odds. Each street will cost you 4 bets. You should generally assume when you hit call that you will be calling 4. If the odds aren't there for calling 4 bets, you should fold. You should be able to play your draws near perfectly because of this huge amount of information that you are using and your maniac opponents are not. (An interesting philosophical aside: If your maniac opponents decided to start using this information then the information would cease to exist. The very information the maniac creates must be unavailable to him.)
Almost all of your money is going to come post flop. Playing a little too loose or tight preflop won't make a huge difference. Knowing when to continue with the hand after the flop is everything. Along with the advice others gave here for preflop selection, I would say drop some of the weaker unsuited hands. Also, you can pretty much ignore position. If 5 ore more people are seeing the flop with a cap every hand, then you can play any hand from UTG that gets the right odds in that situation. You don't have to worry about raises or too few people in the pot. You pretty much know what is going to happen. Being out of position does not really hurt you after the flop either as you know what is going to happen.
Pay the most attention to the non maniacs in the hand ... each person is going to have their own set of standards for continuing in a hand. Learn it so you know what you have to beat.
Be careful of one or more maniacs suddenly behaving normally when you are in the pot. They are there to gambool and you are there to take their money. If they notice this and decide not to let you take their money, you have to make big adjustments. They may still cap it preflop, but if you stay in on the flop, just call down to the river. If this happens, you have to tighten way up preflop because your implied odds are no longer so good.
|
|
|
|
euphoricism
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Your place or my place
Posts: 3,610
|
|
Id rather have calling stations than maniacs.
|
|
|
|
littleogre
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,344
|
|
I understand what you guys are saying about there being moneyto be made but a bad session versus 2 players that feel it is there duty as a person to make sure they get the last bet in = huge variance. Here is an example of where i feel having 2 maniacs in the hand makes things much more difficult. This is just an example of a situation and not a literal hand. Ok i've got lets say ace/8 of hearts inbetween the 2 slag players. I belive that is the technical pt term for a maniac. I already know it's gona cost me 4 small bets 2 see the flop but i don't mind as a good flop could win me a huge pot. Problem is i don't that nice flop i gets something like k/8/10 with 2 community cards being of the same suit now with just 1 slag we can control how much it is gona cost us to see the showdown but with 2 we are just gona be stuck in the middle of there raising war. If we want to show down that pair of 8s it's gona cost us . So i guess wha i'mtryng to ask is how do you play marginal post flop hand stck between 2 maniacs.
|
|
|
|
euphoricism
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Your place or my place
Posts: 3,610
|
|
If youre asking, you shouldn't.
Play more suited connectors. Take cards farther than you normally would, but not too far.
Camp for sets.
|
|
|
|
stingo0
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 33
|
|
This is my dream table...
|
|
|
|
ArcticKnight
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: golf course
Posts: 416
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by littleogre
Ok i've got lets say ace/8 of hearts inbetween the 2 slag players. I belive that is the technical pt term for a maniac. I already know it's gona cost me 4 small bets 2 see the flop but i don't mind as a good flop could win me a huge pot. Problem is i don't that nice flop i gets something like k/8/10 with 2 community cards being of the same suit now with just 1 slag we can control how much it is gona cost us to see the showdown but with 2 we are just gona be stuck in the middle of there raising war. If we want to show down that pair of 8s it's gona cost us . So i guess wha i'mtryng to ask is how do you play marginal post flop hand stck between 2 maniacs.
|
Why would you even consider playing A8s three-way for 4 small bets from any position? Fold and wait for a MUCH better hand.
|
|
Gone golfing ..see ya in the Fall of 2006
PS. What did the snail on the turtle's back say?
Wheeeeeeeee........
|
|
ihategnomes
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,225
|
|
Quote:
|
Id rather have calling stations than maniacs.
|
Whoever said to start playing one gappers and other implied hands are on crack. Against these types of players you will waste too many bets with hands without showdown value.
|
|
Field mice are fast, but owls can see in the dark.
<Bbickes> i still wanna know if the thing in your avatar is a real chick or not
<Bbickes> or am i e-crushing a dude
|
|
littleogre
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,344
|
|
Ty to all for there help. knight ask why i would play A/8 suited from any position for small bets. My only answer would be that perhaps yes that is a mistake and i am over estimating my implied odds. Now as far as what i would be thinking when i made that call i would be thinking maybe i'll hit a nut flush or boat or trips or 2 pair and win 40+ small bets. Ofcourse hands like 2 pair would have a much better chance of failing leting me down then a nut flush or boat.
|
|
|
|
euphoricism
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Your place or my place
Posts: 3,610
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ihategnomes
Quote:
|
Id rather have calling stations than maniacs.
|
Whoever said to start playing one gappers and other implied hands are on crack. Against these types of players you will waste too many bets with hands without showdown value. |
Yeah, depends if you can get in cheap and get out cheap, which I guess in this case being sandwiched inbetween you probably cannot. I dont want to be capped holding 65s, thats for sure. I'd be playing just about any PPair and KQo+, camping for top pairs.
I'd still rather have calling stations than maniacs. :]
|
|
|
|
ArcticKnight
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: golf course
Posts: 416
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by littleogre
Ty to all for there help. knight ask why i would play A/8 suited from any position for small bets. My only answer would be that perhaps yes that is a mistake and i am over estimating my implied odds. Now as far as what i would be thinking when i made that call i would be thinking maybe i'll hit a nut flush or boat or trips or 2 pair and win 40+ small bets. Ofcourse hands like 2 pair would have a much better chance of failing leting me down then a nut flush or boat.
|
First, pre-flop is too soon to be thinking about implied odds. Are you clear when and in what situations implied odds should factor into your decsions?
2nd, the reasons you listed for playing A8s could apply to just about an suited hand. But that does not mean the hand is strong enough to play.
3rd, do you realize how rare it is to have 40+ small bets (20 Big bets) in a hand. If the pot is that large, your heart flush has a strong chance of being 2nd best to a boat. Also, if y0u get sucked into a AAX board with that many bets, your hand is surely going to be on the losing end.
Littleogre, why don't you tell us what books you have read so we can suggest some. Have you read SSH and Theory of Poker?
Please don't take offence. You should only worry when people ignore your posts or start flaming you.
|
|
Gone golfing ..see ya in the Fall of 2006
PS. What did the snail on the turtle's back say?
Wheeeeeeeee........
|
|
littleogre
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,344
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ArcticKnight
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by littleogre
Ty to all for there help. knight ask why i would play A/8 suited from any position for small bets. My only answer would be that perhaps yes that is a mistake and i am over estimating my implied odds. Now as far as what i would be thinking when i made that call i would be thinking maybe i'll hit a nut flush or boat or trips or 2 pair and win 40+ small bets. Ofcourse hands like 2 pair would have a much better chance of failing leting me down then a nut flush or boat.
|
First, pre-flop is too soon to be thinking about implied odds. Are you clear when and in what situations implied odds should factor into your decsions?
2nd, the reasons you listed for playing A8s could apply to just about an suited hand. But that does not mean the hand is strong enough to play.
3rd, do you realize how rare it is to have 40+ small bets (20 Big bets) in a hand. If the pot is that large, your heart flush has a strong chance of being 2nd best to a boat. Also, if y0u get sucked into a AAX board with that many bets, your hand is surely going to be on the losing end.
Littleogre, why don't you tell us what books you have read so we can suggest some. Have you read SSH and Theory of Poker?
Please don't take offence. You should only worry when people ignore your posts or start flaming you. |
artic i'm not offended by your post at all and yes i know 40 small bets is normally rare but at this table nearly every pot was 40 small bets by the showdown. When i say the 2 maniacs were caping every street on nearly every hand it is not an exateration (Sp?) It is the literal truth. Yes i know that most tables would actually need a very strong hand to cap every street but that was not the case here. This was a low stakes 6 max table and one of the maniacs claimed to be a higher stakes player just blowing off steam. As far as what books i have read i read ssh a few months back and will probably reread it in the future. I always thought implied odds was just a fancy way to say estimating how many future bets you will make. Lastly i don't get offended by actual and helpful advice.
|
|
|
|
ArcticKnight
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: golf course
Posts: 416
|
|
Implied odds come into play when you have determined that you have less than correct odds to call a bet based on the current pot size, but that the odds would be in your favour if you added the amount of additional bets you anticpate winning if you do make your hand.
The only time I can think of this being a factor pre-flop is with a small pair like 33 or 44 against 4 or 5 players where you are fairly certain you could not win unimproved (and it is 8 to 1 against hitting a set), but you think you make this up with extra bets on later streets. It does not really apply pre-flop to hand like A8s or even AQs, because unlike a pair, you don't really have anything but ace high before the flop.
Anyway, if you are at a table like you describe, and someone is playing below their normal limits, you risk getting run over really bad because hand-reading is almost totally out the window and bullying usually wins.
If you are going to stay, tighten up and play your strong hands agressively, but be prepared to have wild swings.
The fact is that you miss your your flop more than you make them, and unless you want to have a pissing contest with someone who has more money than you (and cares less about losing it), you can expect to be pushed out of pot after pot.
It's a matter of style and strengths. You might find that some very good players (and I am not one) might be able to handle these type of players, while other very good players opt out for more passive and predictable opponents.
I think most players would advise you to find an easier table. It takes lots of experience to turn your opposition's aggressesion into your advantage, and I for one don't have the skill to get caught bewtween two maniacs and survive.
I used to think it was a bad thing to leave a table, but after reading lots of advice, the great players say that there is absoulutely nothing wrong with picking your spots, and it is actaully a sign of poker maturity when you can recoginze when the conditions don't suit your game, and a sign of even higher poker maturity when you can walk from those conditions.
So, you have to ask yourself what kind of opponents you prefer - loose passive opponents, or loose aggressive opponents, and then find some tables with the texture that suits your skills and strengths.
|
|
Gone golfing ..see ya in the Fall of 2006
PS. What did the snail on the turtle's back say?
Wheeeeeeeee........
|
|
midas06
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: NZ
Posts: 2,196
|
|
Arctic Knight hit it on the head. Find a table which suits YOU the best. If playing a certain table is unprofitable for you, then there's no shame in leaving.
|
|
|
|
Xanadu
|
|
Full House
Join Date: May 2005
Location: st. paul, MO
Posts: 966
|
|
But if your roll can handle the variance, it is a good idea to learn to beat such a juicy table.
|
|
|
|
littleogre
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,344
|
|
I have around 450x the big bet is that enough to play maniacs? ssh is the only poker book i have and it mainly teaches how to beat loose passive players.
|
|
|
|
Xanadu
|
|
Full House
Join Date: May 2005
Location: st. paul, MO
Posts: 966
|
|
450 BB is enough if you get up from the table if you lose 100BB or so, which is quite possible at such a table. It's a gamble, but a gamble much in your favor.
While it is true that SSH and most other poker books don't mention tables like this, you don't need a book to tell you how to beat them. Reread my first post on this thread. At this kind of table you have almost complete information on every round of every hand. If you are a solid player that knows how to play the odds, you should have no problem destroying this table. Beating this table requires almost no need of reading opponents, but simply playing the odds.
|
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
Linear Mode
