Depending on the action, I'd probably play 88 hard here. I'd raise pre to 20, and look to c-bet most flops. If maniac three bets, you could call and set mine or 4 bet shove and possibly flip, I don't like either option there. I'd probably wait for a better spot if he three bets to his standard amount (>3x raise).

I don't like calling and looking for a c/r preflop, so definitely making 20 is standard.

It seems like everyone is only thinking about the button raising here, but what if we raise and someone else 3bets us? The other players aren't as deep as the button, and we may have to fold (as opposed to calling if the button 3bets to a reasonable size, which I agree with).

Furthermore, don't we want this pot to be multi-way? 88 unimproved is usually a pretty marginal hand out of position, right? So I think most of the value of this hand is going to be set value. If we limp and it gets raised behind us, we're probably going to see a bloated multiway pot where we can stack someone if we hit the set.

In a game with almost no 3betting (or where more people are deep enough that I can call a 3bet) I like raising here, but I really don't want to call a reraise. This is a rare time I like limping.

If we can't open 88 because of the lunatic, he should be very exploitable.

Open to $20, unless your AA hand was in ep and you opened larger.

I assume APD has added in the additional information to the OP. Raise 20. We really only hating life if we get 3 callers. If it goes HU, we're happy. If it goes 5 way, we're happy.

If the button 3 bets a ridiculous amount like $160, it is a shove or fold. You've got the best FE you could have right now because of the AA hand. If it is more like 60, then call and play some poker. I wouldn't just set mine in this situation.

^^This is what I'm thinking too. Raising or limping isn't going to matter much when we have a serial 3better on the button. Either way, I can't foresee the hand going more than 3 ways at the most (heads up most likely) .

I won't ever flat a 3bet oop against this guy, unless I have predetermined that I won't fold post flop no matter what the board texture, runout etc.

Raise or limp....I can see arguments for both..the important thing is NOT to fold rather shove over if he raises or 3bets an obnoxious amount

One large 3 bet in 25 hands does not tell us he's 3 bet crazy. He could have had a big hand. Certainly not enough to expect to get 3 bet. Plan for it? Yeah, but don't make it a given.

OP, the lunatic wasn't the guy you stacked with AA was it?

3betting once in 2.5 orbits is not a serial 3bettor.

Limp/call is okay here if unimaginative, probably better for vast majority of players - myself included. OOP and deep stacked w/ hand that is likely to be second pair is not my favourite situation against an unpredictable lunatic. (Against a fit and fold, I like the situation just fine.)

I don't like shoving to a 3-bet. 88 isn't much of a favourite against JT+, so you aren't much ahead of lunatic's 3-bet range, and you are probably well behind his range for 3-betting and calling a shove.

If one chooses to play this one aggressively, then L/R/F would be my tack. If you limp, you can choose to call if one of the other villains raises. Your l/r will get much more respect (and thus initiative) from lunatic than b/c, and he will probably raise anyway.

Your raise will viciously squeeze limpers, creating dead money, and you'll have more information when the betting gets back to you after your limp. If not, then playing multi-way w/ 88 isn't a bad situation.

Also, a mere call from lunatic (and folds from others) will tell you that you are in pretty good shape if 88 becomes second pair, allowing you to play edgy w/o risking 160bb's. Calling lunatics down to the river can be very profitable if you don't mind variance.

Correct...

Lunatic has 3bet 1/25 hands thus far and it was huge. He is not a serial 3balla, just a guy who over bets the hell out of it. More than likely if he 3balls us we are not calling because it will be huge. Even if it is standard size 3 bet do we really like calling it? Are we playing for set value at that point or are we going with our hand? We know we are going to get heat OTF.

Someone said why are we only worried about him? Well it's not that we aren't worried about anyone else, just that he's the one that is going to make like difficult. Everyone else is kind of your average spot at a table. Lunatics are unpredictable and reckless. Medium strength hands, IMO, are hard to play against them. An over card is going to flop more often than not (a very high percentage I might add) and we are going to have to make a decision on whether or not we want to be a hero. This guy adds a dynamic to the table that we need to account for.

OK, I want to play, but I'm still a little confused on the lunatic...is he limping like every hand, with only the random enormous 3bet? That doesn't seem clear to me yet...

I'd raise here, 25ish...maybe similar to sizing when OP had AA? Might give more strength to his bet given that hand. If UTG+1 reraises, I might find a fold, esp. if he actually folded an overpair on the flop (though we don't know the action, I suppose). From the lunatic, if we do have an accurate sizing tell, I would be inclined to 4bet if he's showing a weak holding. His range seems pretty large though, for putting in big reraises, so if he repops hard, I expect to strongly consider flatting and evaluate flop.

EDIT: ok, so consensus is he's not 3betting constantly...probably still call a standard 3 from him, as read suggests he may be doing so light on a smaller bet.

Ok, given new Lunatic information, we can raise to 20 (my original recommendation) and safely fold to a huge 3-bet from him and call a normal 3-bet.

He doesn't fold preflop?

This seems kind of obvious, but I would say limp/3bet his small opens (for value) and limp/call his big ones (for setmining). I'm assuming his big opens are no bigger than 40ish, so this option would be equal to or better than raise/calling and gives us the advantage of rarely having to fold (only when he absolutely bombs, and then we'd be folding to a 3bet anyway).

The key thing to remember is the lunatic completely drives the play of the table, and we should consider all of our actions in that light. If we aren't specifically trying to exploit him and the dynamic he creates, why are we playing exactly?

I'm opening for $20 here 100% of the time. It sounds like lunatic got a big hand like QQ and made the huge 3-bet because he "always loses with the ladies" or "AK is just like Anna Kournikova... Pretty and never wins." or some other hand he doesn't want to play post flop.

If we get heads up or 3-handed on the flop, I am strongly leaning towards a Check Raise of lunatics bet/call on most boards, especially those with one over.

Open for 20 Ldo.

So far everyone is arguing the raise, lets see some counter arguments.