2 hands I played weakly vs. table bully

[SlyAK]

Ok, a little background on the player I am against in both of these hands. He is very aggressive, and raises to 3.50 preflop about 50% of the time, the other times is a split between limping and folding. If he is first to act after the flop he always bets out 1/2 pot to the pot, (I cant figure out any difference in his hand strength based on the bets). If he is not first to act after the flop he will always bet if checked to him. His aggression continues on the turn and river, and he has lost a couple pots to marginal hands on the river, but has also shown down a couple winners. Usually people are folding to him.

Anyway, he has about $120, and I have $40 (this is NL 50, with .25/.50 blinds), when the following hand comes up. He open raises from EMP for the usual $3.50. I call in MP with pocket 9's suits unimportant. The blinds fold and the pot is $7.75. The flop is QT6r. Not a good flop for me, I was hoping for one overcard, (or zero). He bets out $4.50, and I lay it down like a lamb..... comments???

Hand 2: He still has around $120, and I have $33. One EP limper, and aggressor raises to $3.50 from LP. I am on the button with AdQh. I call the raise, (should I reraise here, considering I am probably ahead of him??). The blinds fold, and the limper folds. $8.25 in the pot. The flop comes down Ts4s2h... Aggressor bets out $8.50, and I fold feeling that he could have anything, but not wanting to make my stand with ace high.

I didnt fare to well against this player and any comments would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Sly

[Huskiez]

I probably would have played them the same way, although maybe even fold the 99. Actually chances are he'll pay you off if you hit the set, so that call isn't too bad.

I think the correct move is to reraise on both preflops, and raise the pot on both flops so he can define his hand better, but I prefer to wait until I have it instead of committing so many chips to a pot where I have pretty much nothing and would be drawing slim (in the first hand after the flop) if beaten. Considering he is loose aggressive, he might push, in which case you'd be in a difficult decision. I would have played them very similar to you though.

[novamob]

I play with a similar player iin my weekly game. I would have played the 9's the same, but the AQ much differently. You say he often raises and is aggresive, which means he could have anything. With AQoff, the only way he has you crushed is if he has AA, KK, QQ or AK. Any other hand you are at worst 40-45%. I say at some point you have to make a stand against a player like this. I'd have come over the top all-in on him.
Now he can't play back at you and hope you wilt. If he calls and you lose, well, you lose, but he will think twice about pushing you around in the future, plus if you win and double up.

[Richie Rich]

This player has a target on his head the size of Texas! I realize that you want to take him down asap, but you have to be patient...remember, this is poker. If I were you, I'd reload my stack and play patiently, waiting for AK/AQ or pocket pair. Then you sock it to him! He can play aggressive like this for as long as he wants, but don't let him take money from you. When you get your good hand, play it strong and double-up. Then do it again.

These "maniacs" seem to go on occasional rushes playing any two cards...but don't let his play influence yours. Play tight aggressive, and you'll get your fair share. Eventually, he will go broke...just the nature of the game.

[eMarkM]

Fight fire with fire, you can't wait to hit perfect with these guys and have to take some risks. They'll just grind you down. I use these maniac tactics myself on passive tables because you get everyone to lay down like this guy was doing. Man, if I can get guys to lay down 99 preflop like one poster advocated, I'd raise every hand, too, and would know to fold anytime someone played back at me. I'd make a ton of money cause I'd always know where I was at.

In most cases against most players I'd probably call with AQ and 99. But not with a table bully. I say reraise him in both cases and take control of the hand. You're allowing him to get away with his bully tactics by just calling and folding when you don't hit perfect. Maniac's aggression is totally warrantted if you let him run all over you like this. You may have been ahead of him post flop in both cases if he's raising any two cards when it's folded to him. Reraise, at least pot sized, maybe even just push in and see if he doesn't start slowing down when he knows you're to act behind him.

[tewall]

You really need to know how he's likely to react if you show strength. If you re-raise, is he more likely to fold, or call? (or re-raise). If he's willing to gamble with anything, you can afford to be more patient. If he's likely to fold if you re-raise, then you can sometimes re-raise as a total bluff, and sometimes with a killer hand.

With a marginal hand like 99, in either case you don't have much to gain by gambling as you are in a small favorate/large dog situation.

With the AQ, there's a good chance you're dominating him pre-flop, so you could re-raise him. Once it reaches the flop, you don't have anything, so there's no reason to call.

My experience with these type of players is they are willing to take chances with sub-par hands, so you can play you good but not great hands much stronger than you normally would.

[SlyAK]

[ QUOTE ]
In most cases against most players I'd probably call with AQ and 99. But not with a table bully. I say reraise him in both cases and take control of the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I completely agree with you on AQ, but on the 99 hand I was in MP, I didnt want to reraise and then have someone from LP have a higher pocket pair, which with about 5 people left to act was a reasonable threat.

Sly

[SlyAK]

[ QUOTE ]
My experience with these type of players is they are willing to take chances with sub-par hands, so you can play you good but not great hands much stronger than you normally would.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good thinking, with the amount of raising he is doing any 2 face cards would probably be ahead more often than not, but I dont want to get too loose especially from EP and MP because there are lots of other players who may stumble across a real hand. Basically the way I was playing it was hoping to flop a set with the 9's, or TPTK with AQ, I figured if the flop hit me I would probably double up. On an aside, I have been struggling with what hands to re-raise with preflop in NL ring games. I always reraise with AA, KK, but otherwise I never know if I should reraise or not with Q's, J's, AK, AQ, etc. I think I am playing these hands too weakly preflop. If you have any thoughts on this I'd appreciate the help.

Sly

[tewall]

I think you've got the right idea in general, but are a little on the conservative side. For example, the AQ is strong enough to re-raise pre-flop, because you're not really afraid of the EP guy, who limped, and there's only the blinds to act after you. If someone (besides the aggressive guy) has a strong enough hand to re-raise you, you can get out, but the chances are strongly in favor of your having the best hand.

The other comment that strikes as a bit convservative is wanting to get TPTK. If you get it heads up against this guy and flop top pair, that should surely be good enough. Especially when you're playing good hands where your kicker figures to be very good, even if not the best.