maniacs, hand ranges, and equity

[mcatdog]

The area of my poker game where I perform the worst (by far) is when I'm up against a maniac. The type of guys who are in just about every pot, raise to 5 BB every time it's folded to them, and often fire three barrels with nothing.

I'm not saying I don't beat these guys, but I think I could be doing A LOT better with a different game plan.

What's the first thing that goes through your head when you sit down at a table and you see a guy throwing a party? How often are you calling his raises? How often are you re-raising him? C-betting? If he folds a lot of the time when you play back at him, how often are you bluff-raising him after the flop? Does your answer change if you are 200 BB deep instead of 100 BB? Thoughts on the different types of maniacs that you've seen are welcome.

[Warpe]

Partial answer: I like showing a tendency to check/raise flops. It seems to help tone down their air aggression against me.

[mb2447]

How often are you calling his raises? How often are you re-raising him? C-betting? If he folds a lot of the time when you play back at him, how often are you bluff-raising him after the flop? Does your answer change if you are 200 BB deep instead of 100 BB? Thoughts on the different types of maniacs that you've seen are welcome.

Calling his raises: with PPs and some SCs depending on # of players in the hand.

Re-raising him: AQ/AK/JJ+, maybe AJ/AT but not a lot.

C-betting: if he shows a willingness to put money in the pot, then you have no fold equity and should usually only bet to isolate or as a semibluff. But you gotta mix it up enough not to be predictable.

Bluff-raising: depends on how i've seen the maniac react to aggression. but very rarely.

If stacks are deep: all this changes are implieds. more willing to call speculative hands PF and flop.

From TOP: "Scrap the general notion that you play tight in a loose game and loose in a tight game and use the folowing guidelines instead. In a loose game you must tighten up on your bluffs and semi-bluffs, but loosen up on your legitimate hands. You bluff less, but you bet for value more. You also call with more hands and play more drawing hands. In a tight game you loosen up on your bluffs and semi-bluffs, but you must tighten up your legitimate hand requirements. You bluff more, but you bet for value less. You also call less and give up more quickly with drawing hands."

[mcatdog]

So basically you play him with your cards face up and just hope that he's terrible enough that you'll crush him anyway.

[zook]

I have trouble in these situations too. But I'll post what I do in hopes I get some criticism:

1) Make sure I have position.
2) Be more inclined to call his pre-flop raises with high card value, less inclined with suited connectors. Still call with all PPs.
3) Re-raise pre-flop more. If we're both in LP, my range is as wide as something like 99+, AQ+, ATs+, KQ.
4) Float and bluff-raise his c-bets more often. I like to try to get a read for how he plays good hands first, but it's hard because these maniacs aren't showing down a lot and once they do, they're often gone right after.

[IowaSkinsFan]

Don't be a pussy, don't be afraid to call him thin, don't be afraid to play Ax against him.

[Jager]

Hey mcatdog I think I played with you last night with a total maniac. I was trying to mix it up a little with him so I could trap him, them I hit AA he called AI preflop w 85s and hit.

[mcatdog]

Hey mcatdog I think I played with you last night with a total maniac. I was trying to mix it up a little with him so I could trap him, them I hit AA he called AI preflop w 85s and hit.

Yep, that guy had a short stack though so he's not really what I'm talking about. Maniacs with short stacks are easy to deal with.

[mb2447]

unless you're sitting at table full of maniacs (in which case you might think about changing tables) i don't see a compelling reason to play a high variance game. as long as you're not squeaky tight, it's reasonable to expect to be paid off when you have the goods.

[zook]

unless you're sitting at table full of maniacs (in which case you might think about changing tables)

I would never leave a table full of maniacs.

i don't see a compelling reason to play a high variance game. as long as you're not squeaky tight, it's reasonable to expect to be paid off when you have the goods.

Maniacs will often give their stacks away before you get the goods. And since their range is so wide, you can open your range against them profitably.

[johnny_fish]

unless you're sitting at table full of maniacs (in which case you might think about changing tables) i don't see a compelling reason to play a high variance game.

The advantage of taking a marginal +EV, high variance shot vs. maniacs is that there are bigger edges in the future if you lose.

[Renton]

i like calling his raises with hands that make top pair from position and then calling him down when i make top pair with those hands

[dpe8598]

i like calling his raises with hands that make top pair from position and then calling him down when i make top pair with those hands

PRECISELY! Forget about pocket pairs. They still have value, but if I a guy is a maniac (a decent one anyway), then he will likely stab a lot, but not really pay you off.

Play face cards! If you hit top pair, than you are most likely ahead, call maniac down and get paid.

You can't just make stands w/ monster hands, because you hit them too infrequently. Maniac counts on this.

It should be added that this strategy is absolute SPEW against solid TAGG players.