Villain one is the maniac from my 99 three. Villain 2 is also a maniac, largely in reaction to how much he hates villain 1. They both play 90 percent of their hands preflop and 3 bet often. They are capable of folding rivers. Maniac one does not believe in checking to the raiser.
8 handed.
I open kq sooooooted utg, maniac one calls cutoff, maniac two 3 bets button, very tight bb calls, I call, maniac one calls.
Flop is A94r. Checks round.
Turn Kr
Checks to maniac one who bets, maniac 2 raises, bb folds . . .
Doesn't seem that tough to me. They are maniacs. First maniac has tendency to donk flop. Gotta significantly discount Ax from their ranges. There's an argument you can even lead turn here after BB checks. Definitely don't fold.
i dont like the bb calling pf, so i'm not sure if i cap here w/ KQs. AQs i am, so it's close. but not having the A makes me a bit hesitant to cap given a tight player is in the blinds and took 2 to the face knowing i opened UTG even though a straight maniac 3b (so he COULD have something like AQo/AJs at the bottom of his range. is he one of those "never 3b from the blinds" types that are going around nowadays? tight and dont wanna give away strength if they hold a bigpair nevermind the value pf types. if he's one of those then i def do not cap).
flop okaleedokalee
turn is wow. i def agree w/ checking and giving maniacs and chance to maniac. but now that you have, wowsa. is there any chance maniac 1 didn't bet his ace after you checked to check to maniac2 on the flop? i dont think maniac 2 can have an ace and imo could have a worse pair and even a worse king than you, but i'm not sure either of you have maniac1 beat.
i think i eject at this point. maniac 2 hates maniac 1 and if maniac 1 knows this maniac 1 might just 3bet and if he does, maniac 2 is always capping given he raised (maybe single digit % chance he doesn't cap if maniac1 3bets now). you'd have to be ahead of both and withstand all action to river.
THAT SAID, if there's a chance maniac 1 would 3b any ace preflop then you have to just gulp and call all bets. i think maniac 1 has like ax suited or unsuited type hand and wouldn't 3bet that pf. either that or he has a worse pair or worse king; however, both of those are less likely than the ace imo as maniac 1 would check those hands just in case maniac2 has an ace. it seems here maniac1 doesn't want it to be checked around again and wants the action. obv these are lots of assumptions for "maniacs" but i think they make sense given what we know here.
there's some schools of thought that just say "maniac = call all bets" but i'd prefer to be a bit more selective than all that. i'd expect maniac1 to 3b here lots and maniac2 to cap and then maniac1 calls and k/calls river and wins like half the time w/ his ace b/c maniac2 just hate raised him lol