Maniacs!!!

[Horrible Player]

How do you deal with maniacs at 1/2 and 2/4 LHE tables? Do you just tighten up (play only G1 and G2 starting hands)?

Thoughts and feedback...

[crockpot]

depends on where you're sitting. if possible, move to the maniac's right asap. having him bet into the field before you act is a huge advantage.

other than that, tighten up a lot and play more aggressively preflop, and be aggressive with weaker hands from the flop on than you normally would, assuming no one besides the maniac is showing strength.

[WarmonkEd]

you mean move to his left?

I'm having the worst experience with maniacs tonight (UB, .25/.50). Boggles my mind that they can stay in so long.

[GuyOnTilt]

if possible, move to the maniac's right asap.

And by 'right' he means 'left'.

[WarmonkEd]

[ QUOTE ]
you mean move to his left?

I'm having the worst experience with maniacs tonight (UB, .25/.50). Boggles my mind that they can stay in so long.

[/ QUOTE ]

I take that back. They just TOTALLY paid off. I was down 30bb, and I just won 32BB after flopping trips.

[bugstud]

we mean the position where you can checkraise him, whatever you call it

[WarmonkEd]

ohhhhhhh. that suddenly makes a lot of sense.

[GuyOnTilt]

Wait up. Are you guys being serious? I'm having trouble following here...

You want to be on a maniac's left, so you isolate him often. Playing heads-up with a maniac with what are probably superior cards is where you want to be. Get on his left, tighten up preflop, and 3-bet his raises with your premium cards. Very profitable place to be.

You do not want to be on a maniac's right.

[crockpot]

this isolation raise makes plenty of sense when you have a big edge over the maniac. in practice, unless your hand dominates the maniac's, you'll be isolating a player who won't fold if he flops anything decent when your edge is less than 60%, and if other players come along you'll have him betting through you throughout the whole hand.

i would much rather have the maniac leading into the field the whole time. if you really need to knock everyone out, you can always bet and hope he raises you.

[GuyOnTilt]

You're wrong on this one. You do not want a maniac on your left. You will have a very hard time limping preflop with anything in EP or MP, because there is a decent chance of a raise behind you. Hands like 66 or T9s would have to hit the muck, even from MP after 2 limpers. It's a horrible seat to be in. Postflop, you will be in a position where others can exploit his maniacal tendencies and push you out of the pot.

This isn't just my opinion. This is the view that is accepted by just about all poker analysts I've ever read or heard. Get position on a maniac: be on his left.

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
You're wrong on this one. You do not want a maniac on your left.... This isn't just my opinion. This is the view that is accepted by just about all poker analysts I've ever read or heard.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ever read or heard David Sklansky? Mason Malmuth? HEFAP p.131. To sum up, sit on his left and isolate. If the other players will not allow you to isolate, you may be better sitting on the maniacs right, trapping the field between the maniac and yourself.

Anyways, some people may not be comfortable making isolation 3-bets against a maniac. For such players, sitting on the maniacs right, tightening up, and trapping the field with their monsters may well be the best choice. To state that acting after the maniac is absolutely the best choice for all players is absurd. What's right for you may not be best for the poster.

My own opinion is that position is most useful against players whose actions reveal their cards. I prefer to have weak-tight players to my right, not maniacs.

[GuyOnTilt]

Anyways, some people may not be comfortable making isolation 3-bets against a maniac. For such players, sitting on the maniacs right, tightening up, and trapping the field with their monsters may well be the best choice. To state that acting after the maniac is absolutely the best choice for all players is absurd. What's right for you may not be best for the poster.

Okay, I can see how some people might prefer this. I guess I was out of line saying that there was only one way to view this. I guess I was really speaking only for people with my particular playing style (tight-aggressive), and people who have a sufficient bankroll. I can see how someone on a small bankroll, less than excellent hand-reading skills, and a little more timid in their play may not be comfortable isolating a maniac. I do think that my way will show greater rewards, but I'm willing to concede that the other way could be done profitably, though to a lesser degree I think.