Complete Crazy LAA on .5/1 Party

[KingOtter]

Tables is Rags to Riches. I've got to go so I left the table, but I made about 50BB off him/her/it.

KO

[KingOtter]

Example hand - CO is LAA:

Party Poker 0.5/1 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is SB with Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, T/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
<font color="#666666">4 folds</font>, MP3 calls, <font color="#CC3333">CO raises</font>, Button calls, Hero calls, <font color="#CC3333">BB 3-bets</font>, MP3 calls, <font color="#CC3333">CO caps</font>, Button calls, Hero calls, BB calls, MP3 calls.

Flop: (20 SB) T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 2/images/graemlins/club.gif, 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, BB calls, MP3 calls, CO calls, Button folds.

Turn: (12 BB) Q/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, BB calls, MP3 calls, <font color="#CC3333">CO raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, BB calls, MP3 calls, <font color="#CC3333">CO caps</font>, Hero calls, BB calls $1 (All-In), MP3 calls.

River: (28 BB) T/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players, 1 all-in)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, MP3 calls $1.59 (All-In), <font color="#CC3333">CO raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, CO calls.

Final Pot: 36.77 B

Results in white below: <font color="#FFFFFF">
Hero has Qs Th (full house, tens full of queens).
BB has Kd 7d (one pair, tens).
MP3 has 8c 3c (flush, queen high).
CO has Jc 4c (flush, queen high).
Outcome: Hero wins 36.77 BB.

KO

[PokerMatt]

Nicely played. Perfect example of why players like that are exactly what we want at the table even if they may catch a break once in awhile.

[hicherbie]

thanks for the heads up
now i get to battle for the scraps with other 2+2ers

[ErrantNight]

you realize your preflop calls, both of them, were horrendous, right?

[gvibes]

[ QUOTE ]
you realize your preflop calls, both of them, were horrendous, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I wanted to say something about this, but he seemed so proud of himself.

[ArturiusX]

How you can call a raise in the sb with QTo is beyond me.

[ErrantNight]

just think people should be careful labeling others as crazy LAA when their play is suspect, if not necessarily EQUALLY suspect. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[KingOtter]

[ QUOTE ]
you realize your preflop calls, both of them, were horrendous, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it wasn't as bad as it looked because the table had gone bonkers.

You did notice that CO CAPPED with J4s, right?

Perhaps I should have explained that CO was raising every hand pre-flop, usually check-raising the flop and raising it whenever he had a chance when the betting got to him. It was a pattern. I DID see him fold a few times, but I figured he kept going if he hit any kind of pair.

Hands CO had shown down the past few minutes were 84s, T8o, that sort of thing. He was getting incredibily lucky and hitting a lot of 2 pairs.

Since he was hitting a lot of pairs people started pushing back whenever they had pocket pairs, too.

Basically all the pre-flop raising had little or nothing to do with what people had in their hand. And I gave it that much credibility.

KO

[KingOtter]

[ QUOTE ]
just think people should be careful labeling others as crazy LAA when their play is suspect, if not necessarily EQUALLY suspect. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you don't understand. He was like 96/85 over 20+ hands.

That right, raising 85% of his hands pre-flop over 20+ hands. And showing down with complete crap. His raises meant absolutely nothing about what he had in his hand.

KO

[KingOtter]

[ QUOTE ]
How you can call a raise in the sb with QTo is beyond me.

[/ QUOTE ]

CO raised, and capped with J4s.
BB 3-bet with K7s.

Pre-flop raises meant nothing at this point.

I'd say I read the table pretty well.

KO

[ErrantNight]

that's a maniac. not a LAA. learn the difference. and give your actual reads. not versions of those reads, followed up by corrections.

[ErrantNight]

to clarify... although i'm a TAG, depending on how you label your opponents based on their poker tracker stats, I could be a LAA... now I'm assuming whoever you label a LAA is still looser and more unnecessarily aggressive than I am, but that's far from being a complete maniac.

further. even AGAINST a maniac, when you have a cold-caller and those to act behind you, QTo is STILL an EXTREMELY marginal holding. and once it's capped coming back, your holding looks even worse. what he actually had is nearly irrelevant, and if he'll cap with anything, it's still nearly irrelevant. the fact is that somebody else is playing back, and others have picked up on his maniacal nature, and are willing to test him out, and your QTo is a very marginal hand and you're about to be playing it out of position when you're easily dominated and entering a huge pot that will be difficult if not impossible to get away from.

so once again i say, your preflop calls, both of them, were pretty terrible. bad might be more accurate than terrible, but i still lean that direction.

[KingOtter]

[ QUOTE ]
that's a maniac. not a LAA. learn the difference. and give your actual reads. not versions of those reads, followed up by corrections.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, when I get to be perfect like you, and never make a mistake I'll probably be able to be an ass to people on the boards just like you.

I can't wait.

Until then, you're just going to have to put up with me making mistakes, and correcting them.

I hope you can handle it.

KO

P.S. I kinda thought the words 'complete' and 'crazy' in front of the LAA might give a slight indication of the TYPE of LAA he was... as truly, I think a maniac is a type of an LAA.

P.P.S. These freaking boards and the flak I'm getting for my posts are putting me more on tilt then any poker playing I've done for the past 6 months.

[KingOtter]

[ QUOTE ]
to clarify... although i'm a TAG, depending on how you label your opponents based on their poker tracker stats, I could be a LAA... now I'm assuming whoever you label a LAA is still looser and more unnecessarily aggressive than I am, but that's far from being a complete maniac.

further. even AGAINST a maniac, when you have a cold-caller and those to act behind you, QTo is STILL an EXTREMELY marginal holding. and once it's capped coming back, your holding looks even worse. what he actually had is nearly irrelevant, and if he'll cap with anything, it's still nearly irrelevant. the fact is that somebody else is playing back, and others have picked up on his maniacal nature, and are willing to test him out, and your QTo is a very marginal hand and you're about to be playing it out of position when you're easily dominated and entering a huge pot that will be difficult if not impossible to get away from.

so once again i say, your preflop calls, both of them, were pretty terrible. bad might be more accurate than terrible, but i still lean that direction.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't get the rating from PokerTracker.

I only had 20+ hands on him so PT didn't even rate him yet.

It was a read of my own. 'Wow, this guy is playing just about every hand, he must be loose. He's raising alot, so he's aggressive. He's aggressive both pre-flop, and post-flop, so he's LAA'.

Didn't think that was too much of a stretch.

Also, concerning the cold-caller and people to act behind me. Everyone wanted a shot at this guy. The table was 42% VPIP even before the maniac showed up, so it had a lot of 'looser than me' players. Including a couple 50%+'ers.

At that table my stats probably looked like a rock. Over the 50 hands I had not rec'd any hands to raise and was only entering the pot about 8% of the time.

Now, I posted the hand to show the behavior of the maniac in question. Instead I'm getting dumped on because of my behavior by someone who didn't play the table for 50 hands, didn't play this maniac for 20 hands, and has no idea what the reads on the other people are.

I didn't present the hand to be critiqued, so I didn't include any other relevant information. I wanted to show the behavior of the maniac in question, not mine.

So before you dump on me again for correcting my post now and including stats about the table and everything, maybe you should ask yourself why you thought it was necessary to make a bunch of random assumptions about the table that I was on.

KO

[UncleSalty]

[ QUOTE ]
P.P.S. These freaking boards and the flak I'm getting for my posts are putting me more on tilt then any poker playing I've done for the past 6 months.

[/ QUOTE ]

Easy boss, we're all here to give our opinions and learn from each other. No one is attacking you, just giving their $0.02. You should know by now that the advice is sometimes brutal and you won't always agree with it.

And, I think those of us who registered in the last six months and are starting to feel like regulars should be congnizant of number two (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&amp;Board=holdem&amp;Number=42826&amp;fpart= &amp;PHPSESSID=) . /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[KingOtter]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
P.P.S. These freaking boards and the flak I'm getting for my posts are putting me more on tilt then any poker playing I've done for the past 6 months.

[/ QUOTE ]

Easy boss, we're all here to give our opinions and learn from each other. No one is attacking you, just giving their $0.02. You should know by now that the advice is sometimes brutal and you won't always agree with it.

And, I think those of us who registered in the last six months and are starting to feel like regulars should be congnizant of number two (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&amp;Board=holdem&amp;Number=42826&amp;fpart= &amp;PHPSESSID=) . /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks Salty... no, I'm not there yet, I hope.. /images/graemlins/wink.gif Very cool post, though.

I think I'm overreacting to my play being critiqued when I was trying to post an example of the maniac's raise and call-down tendencies... since I didn't expect my play to be critiqued I didn't include any of the rationalization of what I was doing when I did it, etc., etc... Which *I* think turns my play from 'horrendous' (I'd never do this just out of the blue on a table) hopefully up to 'not so good', but I was also counting on dropping it when it missed post-flop. I just got lucky post-flop.

KO

[kenberman]

[ QUOTE ]
How you can call a raise in the sb with QTo is beyond me.

[/ QUOTE ]

with a read that says "these guys are maniacs, I probably have a better hand, and my implied odds are huge".

you need to make adjustments against opponents like this.

[MrWookie47]

That post made me smile the first time I read it, and I like the way you whipped it out here. I think my favorite part is 8, 9, and 10.

Thanks for posting the HU about the maniac. I'm sure someone is making a killing off of him, but, alas, it is not me. I'm in the lab.

While I realize OP is a little touchy about his play in the hand he posted, I feel compelled to offer at least a little input. I don't blame you for wanting to play QTo versus a maniac. That's a great hand against his range of holdings. The problem is playing against a maniac after someone has already cold called. Even if they've lowered their calling standards because of this guy, that additional player eats into your equity tremendously with a marginal hodling like QTo. When you're playing with a maniac like this, you're generally looking to 3bet to isolate or fold, unless you're closing the action. Since you can no longer isolate once the other player is in, it looks like a fold is in order.

[UncleSalty]

FWIW, If I had a read on CO being a complete donkish maniac, I might make the same call PF. However, you don't really mention BB's behavior until later in the thread when you say the table had gone bonkers. I'm much more worried about his 3-bet than CO's cap at that point, unless you are quite certain he's Captain SuperDonk's trusty sidekick, "Jackass".

In any case, this thread does point out how important it is to provide very specific reads when you believe the correct play differs from standard ABC poker. That alone makes it a valuable discussion, so thanks for posting.

[SlantNGo]

I still don't like it. Heads up vs. an 80% PFR, sure, not 5-way.

[xenthebrain]

I'd fold this preflop

[KaiShin]

If I can't isolate the maniac then I'm not playing QTo, personally.

If I can then I'm 3-betting it PF.

The problem is not the maniac, its the other people in the hand.

[jrz1972]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How you can call a raise in the sb with QTo is beyond me.

[/ QUOTE ]

with a read that says "these guys are maniacs, I probably have a better hand, and my implied odds are huge".

you need to make adjustments against opponents like this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that you need to make adjustments at a table like this, but playing off-suit dominated hands out of position isn't the best adjustment to make.

[KingOtter]

[ QUOTE ]
That post made me smile the first time I read it, and I like the way you whipped it out here. I think my favorite part is 8, 9, and 10.

Thanks for posting the HU about the maniac. I'm sure someone is making a killing off of him, but, alas, it is not me. I'm in the lab.

While I realize OP is a little touchy about his play in the hand he posted, I feel compelled to offer at least a little input. I don't blame you for wanting to play QTo versus a maniac. That's a great hand against his range of holdings. The problem is playing against a maniac after someone has already cold called. Even if they've lowered their calling standards because of this guy, that additional player eats into your equity tremendously with a marginal hodling like QTo. When you're playing with a maniac like this, you're generally looking to 3bet to isolate or fold, unless you're closing the action. Since you can no longer isolate once the other player is in, it looks like a fold is in order.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I am a little touchy about it. And it probably wasn't the greatest call. I'm not saying it is perfect... but it was situational. It's certainly not a move I would make without the maniac at the table.

KO

[KingOtter]

[ QUOTE ]
If I can't isolate the maniac then I'm not playing QTo, personally.

If I can then I'm 3-betting it PF.

The problem is not the maniac, its the other people in the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I took them into account when I called.

Had ANY of the other people in the hand shown some TAG tendencies, or any tendencies at all towards tight play I would have dumped it on the flop. But honestly, I don't remember a tight player at that table besides me (my stats going into the maniac's play were 8%VPIP, 0%PFR over about 40 hands).

All 3, Button, BB and MP3 were very loose players. BB was probably stinging since I called a stone-cold bluff in the hand immediately before this one. MP3 was probably the loosest one, but all of them were loose even before the maniac showed up. All 3 of them (besides maniac) were consistently showing down Face-rags, or worse.

6 hands before this one maniac had one a $18 pot, then a $31 pot, then a $21 pot. Then he took a couple down without showdown, and I took down the next pot calling down BB's bluff with a pair (maniac had actually folded that hand).

This was an extremely situational call. I can agree it still wasn't a great call.. or even a good call... but I knew I could let it go post-flop if I didn't hit on the flop.

I really didn't post the hand to be critiqued or I would have included some more information about the table. I really just wanted to show that the maniac was capping pre-flop with J4s (or whatever), and capping the turn on a flush draw.

KO

edit: changed UTG to MP3

[Zaxenexaz]

Fold preflop and wait for a better situation

[ArturiusX]

Just one thing you should think about, just because they're a maniac does not mean they can't be dealt a premium hand.

Maniacs recieve the same amount of AK and QQ as we do. You need to consider this with your preflop selection. Don't be afraid to 3-bet with KJs, but don't think that QTo will be good. Reverse implied odds still applies to you no matter what kind of player you're up against, as long as they hold the two cards.

This concepts more of a no limit thing I think (i always respected maniacs to a degree in limit), because you can lose your entire stack through not respecting people.

Just a friendly reminder.