AK against maniac w/ good draws ($4NL micros)

[rowhousepd]

I was playing against a total crazy maniac (50/25/2.5) over about 100 hands and had seen him just dumping chip & rebuying like a real (drunk?) idiot. I wanted in. Here's how it went.....

Merge, $0.02/$0.04 No Limit Hold'em Cash, 8 Players
Poker Tools Powered By Holdem Manager - The Ultimate Poker Software Suite.

BTN: $3.94 (98.5 bb)
SB: $2 (50 bb)
Hero (BB): $4 (100 bb)
UTG+2: $3.76 (94 bb)
MP1: $3.70 (92.5 bb)
MP2: $6.71 (167.8 bb)
MP3: $4.42 (110.5 bb)
CO: $11.43 (285.8 bb)

Preflop: Hero is BB with A K
3 folds, MP3 raises to $0.14, 3 folds, Hero raises to $0.44, MP3 calls $0.30

Flop: ($0.90) 5 3 Q (2 players)
Hero checks, MP3 bets $0.90, Hero calls $0.90

This maniac would have bet on just about any flop, so a wet one like this didn't necessarily scare bc of my K. My A is a blocker against some of his Ax hands ... but am I saying? There's no point of trying to put him on a range. He could have QQ just as easily as 89 and will bet like he's got the nuts w/ whatever. Knowing it's is coming, perhaps unwisely, I call the large bet.

Turn: ($2.70) J (2 players)
Hero checks, MP3 bets $3.08 and is all-in, Hero ... ???

Ok, this is nice I think; I have a near nut flush and an inside straight draw. My Ace might not be good if he's got like AQ or AJ or waaaay worse. This very well could be an 18 outer (FD + ISD + Overs), but even w/out some of them, there are still a lot of cards that can crush his possibly junk hand.

One problem though, my stack is getting short and he shoves (for like the 10th time in the last half hour). It's almost exactly 2:1 pot odds to call. What do I do? Am I stoopid for getting this far into this mess?

[daviddem]

3b bigger preflop.

Check/shove flop imo. There is a good chance that you have the best hand and that he will call with worse, and if not you have tons of outs.

If he's got any sense, there is also a slight chance that he would fold 2nd or 3rd pair.

I prefer c/r to cbetting because:
1) if he checks behind, fine, you get a free card
2) if he bets when checked to, he's got tons of bluffs / worse draws in his range and you can shove over with good equity and some fold equity
3) if you cbet and he raises, this narrows his range somewhat and it becomes harder to justify a call or shove
4) if you cbet and he calls, the turn is a blank most of the time, you're OOP and you're in the goo.

Whichever way, c/c is your worst option imo (even worse than c/f), because you often miss OTT and for sure he will barrel. And if you hit your flush it might stall him.

As played, you have 16-18 outs OTT and 33% pot odds. Call. edit: actually it's probably borderline, because your A and K are not always outs, sometimes when you hit a flush he's got the Ah, etc. Pretty much a coin flip I think. Stove it.

edit: open shoving the flop is also an option. Probably better fold equity than c/r and you don't mind if he calls.

[spoonitnow]

http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...ll-173396.html

[daviddem]

and +1 to what Spoon said: read that link, do the analysis as explained in the thread, and report back here with your results

[Arjonius]

he open-raised rather than limping, which narrowed his range somewhat. Still, AK is strong vs that range. If he's likely to call a bigger 3bet, then I'd bet more.

I'd also consider leading this flop. If I check, he seems likely to bet any holding, and I have to decide what to do without having gained any more info. Betting puts at least some pressure on him vs giving him free rein to put it on me.

[rowhousepd]

3b bigger preflop.

3x the original raise is usually my size from the blinds. Are you saying a larger raise is best against this maniac bc I probably have his range crushed?

I prefer c/r to cbetting because:
1) if he checks behind, fine, you get a free card
2) if he bets when checked to, he's got tons of bluffs / worse draws in his range and you can shove over with good equity and some fold equity
3) if you cbet and he raises, this narrows his range somewhat and it becomes harder to justify a call or shove
4) if you cbet and he calls, the turn is a blank most of the time, you're OOP and you're in the goo.

Whichever way, c/c is your worst option imo (even worse than c/f), because you often miss OTT and for sure he will barrel. And if you hit your flush it might stall him.

In hindsight, I think you're right for all of the above. I think I often go into calling station mode vs. maniacs because of implied odds, especially if I have a good draw. But yeah, this makes sense.

And I also like the idea of possibly open-shoving. According to Stove, I'm a 65% favorite (vs a standard 25 prf) on the flop.

edit: actually it's probably borderline, because your A and K are not always outs, sometimes when you hit a flush he's got the Ah, etc. Pretty much a coin flip I think. Stove it.

Here's a scenario on the turn where he continues w/ any heart he would have praised pf with, any broadway cards, and obviously any pair.

42.16% { AcKh }
57.84% { 22+, ATs+, A5s, A3s-A2s, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, Ah9h, Kh9h, Qh9h, Th9h, Ah8h, Kh8h, 9h8h, Ah7h, 8h7h, Ah6h, Ah4h, ATo+, A5o-A2o, KTo+, QTo+, JTo }

http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...ll-173396.html

Thanks, Spoon. I have it bookmarked and will look at it tomorrow.

I'd also consider leading this flop. If I check, he seems likely to bet any holding, and I have to decide what to do without having gained any more info. Betting puts at least some pressure on him vs giving him free rein to put it on me.

+1 (again, in hindsight.)

[rpm]

i tend to go 3.5x minimum when 3betting preflop from the blinds (except BBvSB). the fact that this guy is a complete action junkie and/or hates money only makes me want to make it bigger than that. i'd 3b to around $0.6 pre. if you have seen him station vs 3bets in the last 100 hands then by all means go even bigger.

on the flop i'm very comfortable to check/shove and his betsize only makes shoving more enticing. his range seems so wide that we're either going to have plenty of fold equity (if he decides to play his range "sensibly") or pot equity (if he does in fact hate money and calls us off with any pair in this spot). either way, definitely seems better to get our money in while our equity is high than to see a turn card OOP vs an aggro opponent with these stacks sizes and a hand which decreases in value over streets

[rpm]

i'm drunk and not very good at explaining what i think at the best of times. if that post doesn't make sense but you are interested in trying to make sense of it check out a post called "no such thing as a made hand" by ISF

[postiga]

Yeah, i agree with check-shove in flop. As played fold in river with no problem.

[rowhousepd]

i tend to go 3.5x minimum when 3betting preflop from the blinds (except BBvSB).

Thanks RPM. Just curious. What would bet size be BB vs SB?

[DoubleJ]

Just curious. What would bet size be BB vs SB?

3x again, as you're IP in this situation.

[rowhousepd]

3x again, as you're IP in this situation.

And you think something like 3-3.5x is appropriate for raise sizes when your opp in the blinds (and assuming you're not playing against a total maniacs idiot)?

[MadMojoMonkey]

And you think something like 3-3.5x is appropriate for raise sizes when your opp in the blinds (and assuming you're not playing against a total maniacs idiot)?

@ bold: I assume you meant OOP (Out Of Position) and not opp (opponent)

In the case of BB vs SB, Hero is not OOP; Hero has position in the BB, and is defending against a steal (if no one else is in the hand, it was folded to SB. If we're talking about 3-bet sizing, then SB opened when folded to.)

You seem to be thinking that it was SB vs BB, in which case it would be Hero in the SB, and OOP in the hand. Since we're talking 3-bet sizing, it means Hero limped SB when folded to, BB opened, and now Hero is considering how much to limp-raise from SB.

When you state the positions in the match up, always put Hero's position first.

[rowhousepd]

@ bold: I assume you meant OOP (Out Of Position) and not opp (opponent)

Yikes, your are correct. I mean OOP.

In the case of BB vs SB, Hero is not OOP; Hero has position in the BB, and is defending against a steal (if no one else is in the hand, it was folded to SB. If we're talking about 3-bet sizing, then SB opened when folded to.)

You seem to be thinking that it was SB vs BB, in which case it would be Hero in the SB, and OOP in the hand. Since we're talking 3-bet sizing, it means Hero limped SB when folded to, BB opened, and now Hero is considering how much to limp-raise from SB.

When you state the positions in the match up, always put Hero's position first.

Sorry for the confusion. Yes, I do understand the positional difference, but I I guess meant to ask a slightly different question:

If you're saying something like a 3x raise amount is appropriate for a situation when you're IP (like BB vs SB, or maybe Btn vs CO), what raise amount is good when your OOP in the blinds facing a raise from a non-maniac who will be in position on folp. Let's assume a fairly straightforward player w/ no reads. Thanks.

[DoubleJ]

If you're saying something like a 3x raise amount is appropriate for a situation when you're IP (like BB vs SB, or maybe Btn vs CO), what raise amount is good when your OOP in the blinds facing a raise from a non-maniac who will be in position on folp. Let's assume a fairly straightforward player w/ no reads. Thanks.

i think rpm already answered that; "standard" line is to 3x IP, but to go larger OOP (usually 3.5x) to charge a premium for Villain to continue.

but 3Betting is far more situation-and-player dependent than "3x IP, 3.5x OOP".

crude example - if you're 3Betting for value against someone you know will call a 5x raise, then why wouldn't you 5x?

If you are 3Bet-Bluffing someone who will fold to 100% of 3Bets, then you could just min-raise and get the same result for less risk

[OngBonga]

Shove pre.

[spoonitnow]

Shove pre.

This suggestion isn't as absolutely horribly terrible as it seems to sound since it's hard to quantify whether we get a larger advantage from a more normal size of 3-bet.

[OngBonga]

He's either a moron or drunk, perhaps both. I expect him to call most of his range because he's not playing poker, he's gambling. If he folds, oh well, we took down the pot oop with AK, that's fine, and next time we don't shove because we know he has a fold button. I would shove this, I'm certainly not trolling. I wouldn't standard shove AK here vs the average villain, but this guy... I'm salivating.

[rpm]

if we are going to utilise an "unconventionally" large 3b, i'd prefer to 3b to ~33bb and plan to jam any flop. that way he will probably still take a flop 100% of the time. think that makes him more inclined to take a flop (and gives him a chance to go spastic and jam with hands he might fold to a shove).

even if we don't do that, we can definitely 3b larger than OP did imo, because this guy has no idea about what a standard 3b size is, and he hates his money

[rowhousepd]

but 3Betting is far more situation-and-player dependent than "3x IP, 3.5x OOP".

crude example - if you're 3Betting for value against someone you know will call a 5x raise, then why wouldn't you 5x?

If you are 3Bet-Bluffing someone who will fold to 100% of 3Bets, then you could just min-raise and get the same result for less risk

This makes a lot more sense to me now. Thanks, DoubleJ!