Advice palying with 3 to 4 players that raise with nothing

[PJM1206]

This morning I was playing at a $1-2 table at Poker Stars where there were 3 to 4 players ( full table of 10) that would raise and re-raise with zip, nada, not a dam thing. Examples being 3 betting Q5s, Capping A9o etc etc. Then capping flop when missing board.

I found myself calling down to the river with decent hands and getting beat on the river. My raises would not elimnate anyone, they would just re-raise even if they missed.

Here's my question: Given the way they were palying should I have folded to all but the very strong hands knowing they had nothing? By decent hand I refered to was top pair top kicker. They would typically catch the str8, flush, set, or 2 pair ( not my day but.....) They eventually lost all the money they won from me. I just donated to the table, my early X-mas present to my friends at Poker Stars. I have run into this a few times before with similar resluts.

I consider myself a fair to good palyer avgeraging over 1BB over 40K hands but..... I typically do ok but there are situations I need improvement

[bottomset]

I don't play in games with 3-4 maniacs

I like games with 1, especially with position, since you can often control the pot size and action

I don't mind 2 maniacs but you lose a lot of your control, and its tough to play hands when both are involved

I won't play with 3+(save 2+2lag tables) its way to erratic for my tastes

[cfjr2]

I'm not sure what the specific correct play is here. I'm fairly certain it will be high variance as with 3 or 4 maniacs in the hand any random draw may come in (low str8, medium str8, any flush, etc).

I believe in that situation TP or possibly even 2pair become much less valuable and you have to draw to your flush / str8 (nut str8 and A or K flush) when you do you expect to win more than what was lost in prior pots (you will likely lose 8 sb and 1-4 bb if you see the turn, etc) This happens since for every bet you put in you are called by 4 so you only have to win 1 in 5 (actually less since you will get called on the river it seems) but you need nut hands to beat their randoms.

As I say this is very theoretical EV stuff and the above is my gut interpretation but I am VERY uncertain about this and await other's comments.

[NobodysFreak]

I'm grunching here a bit...

With 3 or 4 maniacs at the table I'd probably just accept the variance for what it is. I'd be willing to take more risks with high cards (KQ, KJs, QJs) and hands like A9o and above, but I'd want position and callers. I think the key here might be their post flop play. If they're going in with Q4o and getting very passive after the flop, I'd say go ahead and take some chances because these guys stand to pay you off. If its the same 3 or 4 guys in every hand, sit back and let them pass chips back and forth a bit. I'd also be more inclined to pay close attention to how everyone else is responding to these manaics. If the calling stations are getting fed up and are making more loose calls, you might be able to play more Axs hands and medium pocket pairs. I might be spewing here, but given the rancid pre-flop play you're suggesting, I'd rely on my post-flop play to bring me the money.

[benkath1]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't play in games with 3-4 maniacs

I like games with 1, especially with position, since you can often control the pot size and action

I don't mind 2 maniacs but you lose a lot of your control, and its tough to play hands when both are involved

I won't play with 3+(save 2+2lag tables) its way to erratic for my tastes

[/ QUOTE ]