Maniacs in the 33s at Party

[hummusx]

Last night I took a stab at the 33s. I played about 25 of them and the most striking thing was that just about every single table had 1-3 people that were playing way too many hands and just running all over the table. I'm talking VP$IP > 50 and PFR > 30. It was extremely frustrating because my cards were running pretty cold and I could never open push. Almost every single table had two of them, and it wasn't the same people either. Was there a full moon last night, did I just get lucky, or is there an organized gang of maniacs running around the 33s?

[Walter Pullis]

I know what you mean. It is often frustrating playing online
when you run into players that don't know what they are doing and just throw in chips like its a play money table.

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
Last night I took a stab at the 33s. I played about 25 of them and the most striking thing was that just about every single table had 1-3 people that were playing way too many hands and just running all over the table. I'm talking VP$IP > 50 and PFR > 30. It was extremely frustrating because my cards were running pretty cold and I could never open push. Almost every single table had two of them, and it wasn't the same people either. Was there a full moon last night, did I just get lucky, or is there an organized gang of maniacs running around the 33s?

[/ QUOTE ]

Irie has trained a team of maniacs. They are 20 tabling right now in a sweatshop in an unknown 3rd world country.

Staking players is so 2004. In 2005, it's all about outsourcing.

[hummusx]

It does bring up a serious question though. If I'm finding myself in this scenario where it is rarely folded to me in mid or late position and normal-largish raises are almost always called, what's the best way to adjust? I would guess that even against a couple of maniacs loosening your calling requirements more than a little is probably not a great way to go. What about open pushing sooner? Like with 10-13BB, open push instead of raise? 15BB? I hate putting in 4BB on a semi-steal when I've only got 14BB left only to be called by both the small and big blinds.

[john_]

[ QUOTE ]
I know what you mean. It is often frustrating playing online
when you run into players that don't know what they are doing and just throw in chips like its a play money table.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is that frustrating? Sounds like the ideal game to me.

[Socrates]

Agreed. If you can't beat bad players you'll never beat good ones. I'd love to have them at my table everytime.

[Paul2432]

The way to beat these players is to play more hands. Be careful though when a maniac has raised and a solid player has called. Generally, without a premium hand, only get involved in late postition. Your strategy will vary depending on how the maniac plays post-flop. If they raise a lot pre-flop then become passive post flop, that is the best situation. Call the raise and then bet when they check to you. If the maniac bets then fold unless you have made something decent.

On the other hand if the maniac frequently continues with nothing then you can either call down or raise if you have something decent, and bluff raise or fold when you miss. On an average board that I miss, I would fold most of the time, and bluff raise maybe 20%.

If the maniac is of the suicidal variety (that would re-raise all-in on the flop with no-hand, no draw), you may need to call all-in with as little is middle pair. This type of maniac is somewhat rare, so you need to see some evidence of this type of play)

Note the above mainly refers to the first two blind levels.

Paul

[Tilt]

Awesome post.

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
The way to beat these players is to play more hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

If there are multiple maniacs in the game, the best policy is to sit back and watch them kill each other and/or put bad beats on anyone who chooses to mix it up with them.

If you get a big hand, definately go to the felt and try to double up, but there's no sense in trying to outplay these guys in the first 2 levels. It's not like you can bluff them.

Sit back and hopefully there will only be 6 left by level 3 or 4. Now you are splitting the prize pool 6 ways, not 10.

[hummusx]

[ QUOTE ]
Agreed. If you can't beat bad players you'll never beat good ones. I'd love to have them at my table everytime.

[/ QUOTE ]

At a cash table, yeah I'd love to have a couple maniacs. I can get in there and mix it up with them, see some flops. But in a tournament when blinds are at 100/50 and you've got 900 with a maniac in front of you raising it to 350 and a maniac behind you yet to act, how many hands are YOU getting involved in? Sure it's great to have these guys around if you're getting nice cards, but when you get to the phase of the tournament where you're supposed to be playing your stack this setup really sucks.

Give me maniacs in the beginning of the tournment, but if they don't bust out early they are a real pain, especially because they usually have a huge stack by then.

[hummusx]

[ QUOTE ]
I know what you mean. It is often frustrating playing online
when you run into players that don't know what they are doing and just throw in chips like its a play money table.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not what I mean exactly. I love people that don't know what they are doing and play too loose. That's how we make money, right?

[john_]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Agreed. If you can't beat bad players you'll never beat good ones. I'd love to have them at my table everytime.

[/ QUOTE ]

At a cash table, yeah I'd love to have a couple maniacs. I can get in there and mix it up with them, see some flops. But in a tournament when blinds are at 100/50 and you've got 900 with a maniac in front of you raising it to 350 and a maniac behind you yet to act, how many hands are YOU getting involved in? Sure it's great to have these guys around if you're getting nice cards, but when you get to the phase of the tournament where you're supposed to be playing your stack this setup really sucks.

Give me maniacs in the beginning of the tournment, but if they don't bust out early they are a real pain, especially because they usually have a huge stack by then.

[/ QUOTE ]

I love maniacs at my STT table...they can't get up till they lose all their chips. Your goal shouldn't be to see as many flops as you can it should be to put your chips in when you have an advantage. Wait it out, once you have a hand you re-raise they call regardless for pot odds even if they don't that's fine. Then you're a 7/3 or 4/1 favorite depending on the hands majority of the time. It's really not that difficult.

I fail to see how bad players playing bad hurts the way you play when it gets to a certain phase of the tournament.

[hummusx]

Well I guess I don't know you so I can't comment too much, but it seems rather obvious to me. A maniac is playing a lot closer to correct as the blinds rise and the number of players go down. Many of their raises are incorrect for me to call, and often it's not correct for me to push my 700 chips over the top of a 350 raise when there is someone yet to act.

Yeah, it's super easy if I'm getting hands that I can put my chips in with an advantage, but if you aren't getting dealt big hands you are out of luck. In a normalish game I don't need good cards to push my way into the money.

And I have no idea what calculator you are using, but how am I going to be "a 7/3 or 4/1 favorite depending on the hands majority of the time".

[Degen]

[ QUOTE ]

If there are multiple maniacs in the game, the best policy is to sit back and watch them kill each other

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly correct.

I get the feeling that a lot of the guys in this thread don't have a lot of experience beating SNG's (poker?).


This is the adage:

If they play loose, you play tight.
If they play tight, you play loose.



Having 1-3 horrible players at your table is a gift from the almighty. What you want is for one of them to gather 4k in chips, bust all the others and then double you up once. So you're at ~2k with him at around 3k and a couple of short stacks.


Andre

[hummusx]

Right. Which is fine, because I'm normally already playing tight (ostensibly since everyone else plays too loose anyway). But I was in this weird place where everyone else had gotten scared of the maniacs too, and like I said in the original post they were just TRAMPLING on the entire table. There were maybe 8 people left at level 4, almost everyone other than the maniacs had 300-600 chips. I had about 800-900. All the short stacks have gotten completely tight. Sure the maniacs were doubling up the short stacks now and then, but I really think they were playing correctly anyway (or close) because they were winning so many pots by sheer aggression.

Is there a time and a place to just forget about building/maintaining the stack and just let the blinds grind me down, hoping that all the other short stacks will grind down faster?

[microbet]

At a crazy table when I am card dead I've come close, but has anyone made it ITM without any VP$IP?

[Degen]

[ QUOTE ]
Is there a time and a place to just forget about building/maintaining the stack and just let the blinds grind me down, hoping that all the other short stacks will grind down faster?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. If it is 4 or 5 handed and you have a very small stack, but there are one or two others who have the same, and for all intents and purposes you are not going to win...then yes, here it is correct to analyze the blinds, where they are, how much you and they will be all-in for or have left if you call and all of that, trying to get to 3rd.

In this situation, where you have one or two monster stacks and the blinds are huge and you have 3-5 shorties, just worry about stealing blinds from the shorties when the big stacks are not in the pot.

Steal once a round from them and you'll be fine, then get lucky and wake up to AA or KK and have a manicac double you up and you're prime for a victory.


Andre

[john_]

Yes, as the blinds go up he's playing closer to correct. It's not that bad to have them to the right of you, you'll know when they're going to raise if you want to attempt to limp a hand. Obviously, you have to push less when you're on or near the bubble into his big blind. There are obvious advantages and disadvantages to this.

I doubt you're pushing your way into the money without good cards either. You can play great but you still need cards to fall the right way to win.

Typical 7/3 situations Ax vs Pair above the x, AK vs Ax
Typical 4/1 situations overpair vs underpair

Just rough estimates anyway...obviously you aren't going to get this type of situation everytime. Poker isn't fair and neither is life. Would you really want it to be?

[hummusx]

[ QUOTE ]
In this situation, where you have one or two monster stacks and the blinds are huge and you have 3-5 shorties, just worry about stealing blinds from the shorties when the big stacks are not in the pot.

Steal once a round from them and you'll be fine, then get lucky and wake up to AA or KK and have a manicac double you up and you're prime for a victory.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah that was the plan, but what prompted me to post this in the first place was that in one of the games with 7 people left, there literally was never an unraised pot that I could open to steal from the other short stacks. And I so hate the 'fold into third' thing, but I guess there's a time when you may have the best odds going that route.