4-way, flopped quads, with maniac in mix

[marchron]

I know SSHE recommends almost never to slowplay, but I was wondering if this were one of the times when it was called for.

The player on the button is the LAG-giest LAG I've ever seen LAG. He played damn near anything preflop and bet it hard postflop. He was fairly successful with it, beating the donks and bluffing out the weak-tighties.

Advice on all streets, please.

.50/1, 9-handed

Preflop: <font color="green">marchron</font> is BT with 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 3/images/graemlins/spade.gif
<font color="#666666">5 folds</font>, CO calls, BT calls, SB calls, <font color="green">marchron checks</font>.

No point raising here, right? I want a cheap flop and I have one.

Flop: (4 SB) 7/images/graemlins/club.gif, 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 3/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>

Here's my decision: play 'em hard or play 'em slow?

SB checks, <font color="green">marchron checks</font> . . .

I decided to raise only if CO bet so I could trap them all for two.

. . . CO checks, <font color="#CC3333">BT bets</font> . . .

Well, that didn't work. I decided then to slowplay to keep the dummies in while the LAG padded the pot.

. . . <font color="#666666">SB folds</font>, <font color="green">marchron calls</font>, <font color="#666666">CO folds</font>.

That didn't work, either. Heads-up, slowplaying this becomes standard, right?

Turn: (3 BB) 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="green">marchron checks</font>, <font color="#CC3333">BT bets</font>, <font color="green">marchron calls</font>.

River: (5 BB) 2/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="green">marchron checks</font>, <font color="#CC3333">BT bets</font>, <font color="green">marchron raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">BT calls</font>.

Final Pot: 8.75 BB (after rake)

[MrWookie47]

Slowplaying is never standard. Betting and raising is standard. If you're going to slowplay, you'd better make a strong case. If the button is the laggiest lag to ever lag, I'm betting out the flop and hoping he raises so I can 3bet and he can cap. Then I'll check/raise the turn. I think you missed a fair amount of value on this hand.

[penisclaw]

Grunching. Please excuse.

You are first to act with a monster, vs a maniac. Lead out the flop, hopefully everyone calls one to the button, who raises and traps everyone for one more. Lead out the turn, and you will likely lose all but the button, or anyone with a 7. Button will raise, and you reraise, expecting his cap. Repeat on the River.

I don't think you extracted nearly as much as you could have on this hand.

[Harv72b]

Given this:

[ QUOTE ]
He played damn near anything preflop and bet it hard postflop

[/ QUOTE ]

The answer to this:

[ QUOTE ]
I know SSHE recommends almost never to slowplay, but I was wondering if this were one of the times when it was called for.

[/ QUOTE ]

Should be pretty obvious.

Seriously....bet the flop, bet the turn, and bet the river. Every single one of those streets featured a pretty little scare card that the maniac would just love to represent, and none of which you need to fear. Especially on the flop, which would be decidedly unfrightening to the other players if you led out on.

Slowplaying is rarely correct. I will go so far as to say that it is never correct when you've got an established maniac in the pot.

[fizzleboink]

[ QUOTE ]

The player on the button is the LAG-giest LAG I've ever seen LAG. He played damn near anything preflop and bet it hard postflop. He was fairly successful with it, beating the donks and bluffing out the weak-tighties.


[/ QUOTE ]

Use your read, pump the pot. Raise it up every chance you have.

[ QUOTE ]


Seriously....bet the flop, bet the turn, and bet the river. Every single one of those streets featured a pretty little scare card that the maniac would just love to represent, and none of which you need to fear. Especially on the flop, which would be decidedly unfrightening to the other players if you led out on.

Slowplaying is rarely correct. I will go so far as to say that it is never correct when you've got an established maniac in the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

(Newbie here, so what do I know, but...) I can see valid reasons for slowplaying the flop, even against a maniac.

1. by waiting for the maniac to bet the flop, this might encourage the others to call the flop bet even with not much of a hand. Perhaps they also realize he's an insane maniac and have no respect for his bets and raises.

2. It seems to me that maniacs start salivating at any sign of weakness in their opponents. By checking, then calling the flop, the maniac will think, "Ha ha look at that pathetic weakling with no hand, I will crush him into the dirt!" and from then on out, raise and reraise every bet made to him, sure that one more raise will make you fold.

[Dave G.]

Why do I see only one marchron raises, but 3 marchron checks and 2 marchron calls? This is even worse when your ill faited slowplay attempt gets heads up, you're STILL checking and calling. Terrible.

Hey, next time you don't feel like making money off quads against your maniac, just toss them my way will you?

This situation is a poker players wet dream. This post however is like being tricked into popping a boner and getting all excited, only to have it ruined by seeing a fat chick in a tiny bikini at the end.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
(Newbie here, so what do I know, but...)

[/ QUOTE ]

How long you've been here doesn't matter; they don't start sending you poker vitamins through the mail after so many posts. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[ QUOTE ]
1. by waiting for the maniac to bet the flop, this might encourage the others to call the flop bet even with not much of a hand. Perhaps they also realize he's an insane maniac and have no respect for his bets and raises.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is pretty much a hit or miss flop for anyone in the hand. Either they have a pair, a flush draw, or they're willing to call with overcards or a gutshot or what have you. Nobody is folding a 7 on this flop (or anywhere in the hand once the other one comes on the turn), nobody is folding a flush draw on the flop, and if a guy is willing to call 1 bet from Hero with overcards, then he'll surely be willing to call 2 bets after a maniac raises. Besides which, on the off chance that one of Hero's opponents is a thinking player, he will intepret Hero's lead bet as some sort of a draw rather than a made hand.

Finally, nobody ever believes you flopped quads. Especially when you fastplay them.

[ QUOTE ]
2. It seems to me that maniacs start salivating at any sign of weakness in their opponents. By checking, then calling the flop, the maniac will think, "Ha ha look at that pathetic weakling with no hand, I will crush him into the dirt!" and from then on out, raise and reraise every bet made to him, sure that one more raise will make you fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that Hero never bet in this hand. He check/called both the flop and turn, and then check/raised a double-paired, 3-suited board on the river. He never gave the maniac a chance to try and bully him down.

You have to be able to get inside a maniac's mind here. When he's raising wildly postflop, it's to represent the best possible hand at that moment--he could care less what you have. If you bet the flop, he's going to raise representing the 3. If you bet the turn, he's raising to represent the 7. On the river you can take your pick between either of them or a flush. He will raise, but only if you give him the opportunity. And when Hero check/raises the river, all he does is scare the living bejeezus out of the maniac because that's what a maniac typically does when he does flop the nuts...and the maniac now knows that Hero is probably not going to fold, so what's the point in raising again?

[VoraciousReader]

[ QUOTE ]
How long you've been here doesn't matter; they don't start sending you poker vitamins through the mail after so many posts.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, but if you're interested, you could read this thread. (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Number=3089558&amp;page=2&amp;view=c ollapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=14&amp;fpart=1) /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[bozlax]

Look, this is what I've finally come to: a player slow-plays to try and make the other players at the table think he has a small hand when he has a big hand, right? So, in the hand you presented, which part of the preceding statement is missing?

It's ok. I've got time.

Think it over.

La-de-deeee, la-de-dahhhhhhh.

Give up? The other players at an Internet .5/1 table DON'T CARE WHAT YOU HAVE. You can't make them think you're weak by slow-playing for the same reason you can't make them think you're strong by bluff-raising...they aren't thinking about your hand. Especially a maniac.

Just go crazy, give up the fancy plays. They're either staying in, or not, and you're better off convincing a maniac (who, by the way, doesn't seem like much of a maniac, here) that you're trying to steal from him than you are trying to finesse him.

[MaxPowerzz]

[ QUOTE ]
This situation is a poker players wet dream. This post however is like being tricked into popping a boner and getting all excited, only to have it ruined by seeing a fat chick in a tiny bikini at the end.

[/ QUOTE ]
LOL...like literally, I seriously fell out of my chair when I read this...

Oh yeah, BET/RAISE every street!!

[ QUOTE ]


The problem is that Hero never bet in this hand. He check/called both the flop and turn, and then check/raised a double-paired, 3-suited board on the river. He never gave the maniac a chance to try and bully him down.

You have to be able to get inside a maniac's mind here. When he's raising wildly postflop, it's to represent the best possible hand at that moment--he could care less what you have. If you bet the flop, he's going to raise representing the 3. If you bet the turn, he's raising to represent the 7. On the river you can take your pick between either of them or a flush. He will raise, but only if you give him the opportunity. And when Hero check/raises the river, all he does is scare the living bejeezus out of the maniac because that's what a maniac typically does when he does flop the nuts...and the maniac now knows that Hero is probably not going to fold, so what's the point in raising again?

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh yeah, no question about it, the whole hand was played wrong. I think a bet on the turn would have resulted in: maniac raises, hero reraises, maniac either calls or possibly caps in order to stay the aggressor. Maniacs are never gonna raise, then fold to the reraise.

Can one assume that he'll raise if hero bets the river, though? I might also tend to check raise the river, especially if the maniac had just called the reraise on the turn and didn't cap.

And, now that I think of it further... a maniac likes raising better than betting in the first place, as raising is far more aggressive. So the maniac would have liked the opportunity to raise Hero's bet on the flop. So betting the flop does seem best to me now. And if Hero just called his flop raise, then bet the turn, he'd have raised again.

[marchron]

You know, there's an Irish saying that goes, "When everyone says you're drunk, you'd better sit down."

In this case, everyone told me I played this hand like a dope. My mom called me up and told me I played like a dope. I walked outside my apartment and a homeless guy called me a dope.

Okay, fine: I'm a dope. I obviously need to go back to square one on this.

BUT, one more than one occasion on these boards (here (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&amp;Board=micro&amp;Number=2901826&amp;Forum =&amp;Words=&amp;Searchpage=0&amp;Limit=25&amp;Main=2901117&amp;Search =true&amp;where=bodysub&amp;Name=36343&amp;daterange=1&amp;newerva l=3&amp;newertype=m&amp;olderval=&amp;oldertype=&amp;bodyprev=#Pos t2901826), for one), the conventional wisdom said not to raise a monster hand against someone aggressive. If he's on a bluff, we want him to continue the bluff and not beat him with the clue stick until he figures out that we have the best hand.

Obviously, this is results-oriented, but he was holding 10/images/graemlins/club.gif/8/images/graemlins/spade.gif. Absolutely nothing. If I reraise him on the flop, I don't make a nickel from him the rest of the hand. Instead, I let him think he could bluff me out, and he gave me three big bets on fourth and fifth street (though why he called my river raise with ten-high baffles me).

Why is one situation different from the other? How can I assume he'll continue to jam the pot when I'm holding the megaphone to his ear and shouting "MY HAND IS BETTER THAN YOURS, DUMBASS!"?

[Dave G.]

You said he was a maniac. Maniacs like to raise regardless of their cards. If he'd fold in this spot, he's not a maniac. Just push it and go for it.

Either way, as Ed Miller states in SSH, "Checking is absurd. They don't know you flopped quads. Even if they did, they'd probably all call anyway". B-E-T T-H-E F-L-O-P-!-!-!

[GTSamIAm]

I like one slowplay attempt, you have all the good cards. One and only one, though.

[Pylos]

Forgive me, I havn't read any of the responses just yet.

I think your flop play is decent, and I only say that because you do in fact want the overcalls by SB and CO, but when you don't get them you should no doubt be betting out and raising against a maniac.

You have extreme +EV, in fact - its close to 100%, unless someone has pocket 7's that is. Come out swinging.

You ONLY slowplay in SMALL POTS and only when you are positive that a bet out will negate your expectation. In big pots, never never never slowplay, not unless your reads are ubersuperduper.

Flop wasn't too gross. Going for overcalls is a good play. The turn is where you destroy yourself. Double paired board to a maniac is like, a full house. They're going to bet out with high card guarenteed. Cap the turn and flop. I guarentee that they will Showdown.

[clownshoes]

This blows, just keep betting and raising.

KISS
bet/raise each street.

[davelin]

The example you gave was HU. Playing passively with a monster in a MULTI-way pot is 99.9% incorrect. And all of the sudden you changed your read on Villain on us.

[marchron]

[ QUOTE ]
The example you gave was HU. Playing passively with a monster in a MULTI-way pot is 99.9% incorrect. And all of the sudden you changed your read on Villain on us.

[/ QUOTE ]
After the flop it was heads-up.

When the other two players were in the pot, don't I want to keep them in? If I can get two bets from them off overcalls instead of raising to force them out and getting one extra bet from Maniac, isn't that a good result?

This is a small pot, isn't it? It's four-way, but it's unraised.

I don't think I changed my read on Maniac. Based on the flop, he has one of the following hands:

1. a 7
2. a pocket pair
3. high cards like A/K
4. diddly squat

I ruled out 2. and 3. because he only limped in preflop. Therefore, if he has a 7, I've missed a ton of value by not reraising and capping. But if he has nothing, I let him give me three big bets because I played possum. And since he played almost any two cards, the odds were a lot better that he had diddly squat than they were that he had a 7.

[bottomset]

[ QUOTE ]
BUT, one more than one occasion on these boards (here, for one), the conventional wisdom said not to raise a monster hand against someone aggressive. If he's on a bluff, we want him to continue the bluff and not beat him with the clue stick until he figures out that we have the best hand.

Obviously, this is results-oriented, but he was holding 10/8. Absolutely nothing. If I reraise him on the flop, I don't make a nickel from him the rest of the hand. Instead, I let him think he could bluff me out, and he gave me three big bets on fourth and fifth street (though why he called my river raise with ten-high baffles me).

Why is one situation different from the other? How can I assume he'll continue to jam the pot when I'm holding the megaphone to his ear and shouting "MY HAND IS BETTER THAN YOURS, DUMBASS!"?



[/ QUOTE ]

um he payed off your river c/r with Thigh, he's not folding at any point in the hand for 1, secondly Maniacs like to bluff-raise scare cards so odds are that he'd raise when the board double-paired or when the board 3flushed, allowing you to 3bet and he'd pay that off

you try and go to war with a maniac when you have a monster

[davelin]

[ QUOTE ]
When the other two players were in the pot, don't I want to keep them in?

[/ QUOTE ]

THis is better accomplished by betting the flop, not check/raising or check/calling.