Re: My remarks.
 

What you have to realize is that such players are the toughest to play against, as maniacs get pocket KKs too. We don't need to pay a cap w/AJs out of position, it's a call.

The chance I'm dominated by the maniac is calculated as AA (3), KK (6), QQ (6), JJ (3), AK (12), AQ (12) = 42 combinations. He raises on approximately 278 combinations of hands. This means I am dominated slightly more often than one time out of seven. Realize that this is approximately the frequency that someone will have AA vs. your KK--yet you would never suggest calling with KK in a million years.

As for your other point, playing the nuts or nut draws is no more difficult against maniacs than against rocks. In fact, in many ways it's easier, as they are the most predictable of any opponents.

It's not profitable as you think as you are failing to calculate the % of time you are 3-bet on the turn by a made hand.

This is not a "made hand" vs. draw position. I will most likely outdraw the aggressor 1 time in 3. I will have the nut straight or higher better than 1 time in 4.

The very worst that can happen is that I get 3-bet against 2 opponents and that my Ace is no good. In that case, my EV is 6 * 12/46 - 3 * 34/46 = 72 - 102 = -30/46 or slightly more than half a big bet. But that's the very worse case.

What is more likely is that I will get 3 callers anyway and my Ace is good. Even if I get 3-bet, I still win: 9 * 15/46 - 3 * 31/46 = 42/46. Almost a full bet in the black. If I cap it, this increases to 56/46.

Therefore, the way it turned out, it's +EV no matter how many bets go in the pot. In fact, I make yet more money on each bet. This is what you do not seem to realize. It makes me wonder how much you're leaving on the table in these situations.

What I will admit is that this play is not without risk. But getting up in the morning is not without risk.

Re: My remarks.
 

"Way out of line" = fundamentally -EV. It's not. It is dangerous, but I like a little danger.

Re: I play g00t.
 

Turn raise = no g00t.

Who taught you this stuff? When is it correct to pump a draw on the turn? Almost never, surely not here.

Brad

Re: My remarks.
 

It makes me wonder how much you're leaving on the table in these situations.

Plays like this are leaving it in my pocket.

I will most likely outdraw the aggressor 1 time in 3.

Hmmmm, you lose 2-3 times but most likely outdraw, interesting.

Good luck with all of this,
Joe Tall

Re: I play g00t.
 

With no relation to this specific hand, I can think of two key reasons to pump a draw on the turn.

1) When the % of the money you are putting into the pot is less than the % of the time you will make your draw (assuming your a drawing to hand which should be the best hand) and;

2) When playing aggressively may buy you additional odds in a large pot

Re: I play g00t.
 

[ QUOTE ]
With no relation to this specific hand, I can think of two key reasons to pump a draw on the turn.

1) When the % of the money you are putting into the pot is less than the % of the time you will make your draw (assuming your a drawing to hand which should be the best hand) and;

2) When playing aggressively may buy you additional odds in a large pot

[/ QUOTE ]

Both of these concepts are very useful, but mainly apply to the flop. The only time I can think about getting crazy on the turn with a draw is when I'm HU with someone who I think will fold a decent % of the time to a semi-bluff raise or check/raise.

Brad

Re: I play g00t.
 

There certainly is no reason not to raise if the situation calls for it just because its the turn as opposed to the flop...

Re: I play g00t.
 

There are three good things and one bad thing that can happen if I make this play:

Good Thing #1: I make more money. I make the best hand at least 12 times in 46. EV = (4 * 12 - 34)/46 = 14/46. If the Aces are good, this is increased to (4 * 15 - 31)/46 = 29/46. Both are healthy profits.

The weakness of this Good Thing is that the other two players might fold if I get 3-bet. This is why I say, repeatedly, that you might not want to do this if you prefer safe, boring poker.

Bad Thing: I get 3-bet. If the absolute worst case occurs, I only have 12 outs and I only win 5 BB. (5 * 12 - 3 * 34)/46 = -42/46. Ouch. That hurts.

Good Thing #2: There's a mitigation, though. If one of the other players has an Ace + pair, and a pair of Aces will win otherwise, my equity in the whole pot goes way up. Because my equity will go up by much more than 1 BB when this happens, this offsets the -1 BB immediate EV of my raise. If they go ahead and cold call with the Ace, then my overall equity is lower, but my EV on the raise ends up being better, working its way positive if everyone calls. See how this works?

Good Thing #3: Indeed, they may all fold, or I might find myself heads-up against a draw made with lower high-cards. This is not likely at all, but I have seen it happen, and it doesn't need to happen that often in a pot this large.

Therefore, I think it's a sound, but somewhat risky, play.

Re: My remarks.
 

[ QUOTE ]
What you have to realize is that such players are the toughest to play against, as maniacs get pocket KKs too.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree, Joe. AJs is too strong of a hand against a LAG to not re-raise pre-Flop for value. While it is true that he will sometimes have a better hand, someone with a VPIP of 90 and a PFR of 20 is going to be raising a LOT of hands here that are MUCH worse than AJs. We're talking A9o, QTo, etc. You're simply giving up too much pre-Flop by not re-raising. Why are you worried about KK? That is not the way to play against a LAG in a large, multiway pot.

-Brian