Adjusting Implied Odds when a Maniac is in the hand

Harv72b · #1 10-22-2005, 01:22 AM

Or, a possibly boring preflop question. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Reads: UTG is a loose/passive & starts the hand with just over 11 BBs. MP1 is a LAG table coach. MP2 is unknown, but his screenname begins with "LAG"...I take this to mean he's tight/aggressive & possibly a 2+2'er. MP3 is a complete & utter maniac that I've played with many times before--if he's raising preflop, he will not stop raising until the river no matter what he's holding or what the action is like. He's already blown through at least 1 buy-in at this table, so I know everyone else has my read on him as well. I'm finishing my first orbit at the table, and have played one prior hand (losing with AK vs. MP1's K8).

Party Poker 5/10 Hold'em (9 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

Preflop: Hero is BB with J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
UTG calls, 1 fold, MP1 calls, MP2 raises, MP3 3-bets, 3 folds, Hero...?

Ordinarily this is a no-brainer fold to a 3-bet, even if I know the 3-bettor is F.O.S; I can't guarantee that the limpers will continue to the flop, nor can I be sure that MP2 won't cap. But do the implied odds when I hit a big hand justify the preflop call here, knowing that the maniac will keep betting & raising and the rest of the table will be less likely to fold, given his image?

#2 10-22-2005, 01:26 AM

won't this not be true because a lot of your 'big hands' will be draws? also you're OOP and you can't trap the field. I know we're better than them postflop but I still say fold.

Harv72b · #3 10-22-2005, 02:10 AM

[ QUOTE ]
also you're OOP and you can't trap the field.

[/ QUOTE ]

I sorta can trap the field if I flop a draw, because I know that MP3 will raise if anyone bets into him; so if I lead the flop and the others are obliging enough to call that bet (or even if they raise it), MP3 will play along and trap the field for me.

Don't know if this changes the decision, but I thought it was pertinent (and dammit, I'd like to hear some more opinions [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]).

QTip · #4 10-22-2005, 02:12 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Or, a possibly boring preflop question. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Reads: UTG is a loose/passive & starts the hand with just over 11 BBs. MP1 is a LAG table coach. MP2 is unknown, but his screenname begins with "LAG"...I take this to mean he's tight/aggressive & possibly a 2+2'er. MP3 is a complete & utter maniac that I've played with many times before--if he's raising preflop, he will not stop raising until the river no matter what he's holding or what the action is like. He's already blown through at least 1 buy-in at this table, so I know everyone else has my read on him as well. I'm finishing my first orbit at the table, and have played one prior hand (losing with AK vs. MP1's K8).

Party Poker 5/10 Hold'em (9 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

Preflop: Hero is BB with J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
UTG calls, 1 fold, MP1 calls, MP2 raises, MP3 3-bets, 3 folds, Hero...?

Ordinarily this is a no-brainer fold to a 3-bet, even if I know the 3-bettor is F.O.S; I can't guarantee that the limpers will continue to the flop, nor can I be sure that MP2 won't cap. But do the implied odds when I hit a big hand justify the preflop call here, knowing that the maniac will keep betting & raising and the rest of the table will be less likely to fold, given his image?

[/ QUOTE ]

I had the exact same situation today Harv. I was 2 seats to the left of a 96/40 and in between us was a 40/16. Of course, maniac raises and lag 3 bets, I held JTs. I went ahead and mucked but hated it. Most of the time when I get in a hand like that with those types of players, I'm thinking showdown almost immediately unless a ridiculous flop comes. Given that fact, I think we're better off waiting for the bigger cards to go to war. I happened to have like a 12 vpip for the session and down $200 after QQ lost to T4 and the list goes on. Anyway, those were my thoughts at the time, and I still like my fold.

QTip · #5 10-22-2005, 02:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
also you're OOP and you can't trap the field.

[/ QUOTE ]

I sorta can trap the field if I flop a draw, because I know that MP3 will raise if anyone bets into him; so if I lead the flop and the others are obliging enough to call that bet (or even if they raise it), MP3 will play along and trap the field for me.

Don't know if this changes the decision, but I thought it was pertinent (and dammit, I'd like to hear some more opinions [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]).

[/ QUOTE ]

Well....on the same token, we're likely to be drawing on the flop instead of betting for value. In this case, others may be using him to pump the pot, putting us in some awkward situations.

BigBrother · #6 10-22-2005, 02:20 AM

I think this is a big 'it depends'.

JTs vs 3-5 opponents OOP. Just cold-calling MP2's raise could be trouble since you could well be dominated, but have the BB discount. Your flush draw would only be to J-high, so a nut straight is probably your best 'big hand'.

Implied odds are huge since you can hide behind LAG's raises, BUT negative implied odds are also huge, especially if TAG knows how to use the LAG on his left as a spring board to charge you for 2 bets on each street.

If you are sitting at this table, you obviously don't mind a bit of variance, so if your read is that you will keep ~ 4 opponents in this hand then playing it seems reasonable to me. You will be able to have a bit of information on the flop before you need to decide whether to continue from there, but chances are you are gone if you don't hit it pretty hard.

Dagger78 · #7 10-22-2005, 02:34 AM

I think your implied odds are quite large, and since the maniac is 3-betting you will probably be able to see the flop 3-5 ways for 3 bets. We also have great relative position on the Maniac for whatever we want to do post-flop.

If the sitation was reversed where the TAG had 3-bet the maniac, I think it'd be a fold. You'd almost definately be paying 4 bets to see the flop and have poor position relative to the maniac on the flop.

Harv72b · #8 10-22-2005, 02:44 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I happened to have like a 12 vpip for the session

[/ QUOTE ]

I tend to have pretty insane stats when I sit at a table with a maniac; stuff like 25/22/3. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] That's assuming he's on my right, of course...on my left is a whole different story.

FWIW, I was 24/16/2.2 in this "session", but it only lasted 24 hands (the maniac busted out again at that point and I took off after that orbit).

QTip · #9 10-22-2005, 02:50 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I happened to have like a 12 vpip for the session

[/ QUOTE ]

I tend to have pretty insane stats when I sit at a table with a maniac; stuff like 25/22/3. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] That's assuming he's on my right, of course...on my left is a whole different story.

FWIW, I was 24/16/2.2 in this "session", but it only lasted 24 hands (the maniac busted out again at that point and I took off after that orbit).

[/ QUOTE ]

There's nothing I love better in a game of poker than to be sitting to the immediate left of a maniac and then have a table behind me that seems content to just watch the show. My stats get pretty wild as well. This session was a bit different for me because I was getting faced with 3 bets more often than just a single raise. And many times, if the lag didn't 3 bet, he called, again making things a bit more complicated.

SNOWBALL138 · #10 10-22-2005, 03:04 AM

Its close, but I think calling here is good because:

1. Maniac has position, so if you flop a good draw, you can bet the flop and trap the field for multiple bets when maniac raises. This was my first thought when I read the hand.

2. When you flop top pair, you will be more likely to get value and less likely to pay off. Any hand with the maniac in it is almost an automatically protected pot. Your bet will get action, but you won't be bluffed by the TAG.

-Snowball