Hero image: They're starting to get onto me, that I might be better than I appear at first sight. They know that I can put them to a lot of pressure when I have it and when I don't. Effective stack $260. Villain covers.

Hand #1
Vil: Old Man Coffee, relative unknown.

* SB posts $1
* BB (Hero) posts $2
* MP limps $2
* HJ (Vil) limps $2
* Button limps $2
* SB calls $1
* Hero has 82 and checks.

Pot is $10. 5 players.

Flop is AQJ Hero has 4th Nuts

* SB checks
* BB (Hero) checks
* Hero intends to check-raise up to CRAI. If checked around, plan to donk bet non-club/non-pair with a $15 overbet (to make it look bluffy.)
* Checks to Vil
* Vil bets $40 into $10 pot.
* Folds to hero.
* Hero tanks.

* Hero folds ???

Hand #2

Eff. stacks $450. Hero covers.
Vil: Aggro Maniac.

* SB posts $1
* BB posts $2
* Folds to MP (Hero) has JJ Raises to $13.
* Folds to BUT (Vil) 3-bets to $200. $250 behind.
* Folds back to MP (Hero). Hero is asked to call $177 for a pot of $403 for 43% pot odds.
* Hero tanks

* Hero folds ???

Results in spoilers in thread.

Results:
Hand # 1

Hand # 2


I do want you to eventually look at the results here, because now knowing these results won't help me realize the best play *at the time* from the above hands, but what should I do with these villains if the situation comes up again?

Hand 1: I think it's your call. As you said, unknown OMC and you are in for 2 bucks. If you play, you will have to call down anything but a 4th spade.

Hand 2: Maniac. I would shove anything down to 88 and probably any 2 Broadways. I would not call with anything.

1. call
2. snap stuff it in

I'd just lead hand 1, I don't think there's worse hands to get value from a c/r in a limped pot.

H1: Just lead flop, x/r is overplaying your hand a little bit in a limped pot and there's plenty of stuff that could call you that is drawing dead. As played, annoying spot. I guess muck? Hard to say without more info on villain.

H2: Fist pump jam.

The nice thing about maniacs is that they get "tricky" when they have AA/KK. This $200 reraise probably indicates something he's happy to get allin but also happy for you to fold, meaning like 99-JJ, AQ+, which is a range you're easily beating. Even if he just has 99+ AQ+ you're even money.

Hand 1 I'm not folding. There's a lot of worse flushes he can have, and I highly doubt he bets $40 into $10 with a king high flush, so only 10 high flushes and 9 high flushes beat you, and he's not playing every combo of those preflop. So there's about 3 or 4 combos each of those that he would play, but you also beat his seven high flushes and lower in addition to straights and two pair. So I'm at least calling flop and turn.

Hand 2 I don't know man, even when maniacs put in $200 preflop cold they usually have something. You're essentially risking $450 when you've only committed $13 to the pot. Again, it's kind of doubtful that he plays AA or KK like this, but do you really crush anything besides TT? If you think so then you've got to put it in.

Hand 1 is never a better flush

Hand 2 might be one of the easiest stick it in his eye in a while

No idea what the **** you're doing turning things into random 3 and 4 bets either.

Didn't see results.

H1 probably calling flop, but i would have lead.

H2 all-in but not a fist pump, he's basically shoving for 225bb eff.

Don't think folding either hand is a super big error where it'll turn you from a marginal winner to a BE/loser, but I don't think I can fold either spot.

You answered your question on hand 2 when you posted reads.

I have definitely seen OMC types go ape**** like this when they flop the nuts. I'd probably call flop, but I don't hate just folding to a 4x overbet.

Hand 2 I just jam it in against the maniac.

Yeah some of these guys just play super, super straightforward, with no guile at all, just betting huge when they make a hand, you have to watch out for it or you can get owned pretty hard. I remember a hand I played once where some old-ish guy check called my cbet on the board 9c 5h 2h, turn comes the 9d and he donk overbet shoves, I don't remember but I think it was like 1.5 to 2 times pot. I contemplate for a bit and call with 88. He turns over A9 of hearts.

I mean the actual hand the OMC had there (KcT) is an even more nonsensical 4x pot bet than if he flopped the nuts. Can anyone have a go at explaining the thought process of betting 40 with broadway and the NFD? Is it to bluff out small flushes?

+1. I have tried to decide what on earth is the thought process here, but so far, I have not come up with any rational reasoning for his bet.

Yeah, I think it's just that he thinks his hand is awesome and awesome hand = bet a lot, but it's hard to say. Like I think the way he views it is that he has the nuts, other than someone having a flush which he sees as being unlikely and unlucky, and he has the flush draw to back him up in that case.

Edit: I'd also suspect that he doesn't really think about bet sizing in terms of fractions of the pot.

It's the hand I expected to see there. "OMG I have a straight on this scary board" plus "I have the best redraw so I don't care if no one believes me."

Non-nut flushes (especially middle ones like OP's, with more lower possibilities than higher ones) will find the bet weird and unconvincing. It smells like a small flush (76, 65, etc.) that doesn't want to see another club. Anybody with the T probably figures they might catch a royal and they and probably the next smaller or two could think they'd catch up on a fourth one on board.

And, if nobody's calling $40 OTF, there's no money in making his nut flush anyway. A reasonable bet probably projects more strength than a strange scared-looking bet. And if he does get a flop call, there's a pot worth playing for.

I'm not saying he's right, or even that he's thinking, but it's possible there's actually some thought behind it.

Hand 1 will just c/c unless 4th flush card hits. No way I'm folding.

Hand 2 will fold and pick better spot.

If you think this is a fold you aren't good enough to find a better spot

Really? You would go to war with your stack with just JJ? Also, this is just 1/2 and eff stacks is $450. That's just gambling and not poker imo. What do the rest of you guys think? Apparently this guy's good enough to gii lol.

I think it's a lot easier to sit at home and say "of course that's what he had, GII" than to think it and do it in the moment.

V's play is sometimes TT/JJ and sometimes AA/KK/QQ. I'm unsurprised that it was TT, but in game I'd have to have a really strong read that the specific V had more TT than AA. The times I call it always turns out to be AA anyway.

Exactly, and they're deepish for 1/2, do we really wanna get into at best presumably a flip with V pfai? Maniac or not, does he really do this with a foolish hand? I dunno about that guy but I'm not playing for stacks with just JJ, but hey, I'm not good enough. Like you said, it has to be a sick read, otherwise it's just gambling. Pick a better spot I say again.

Poker is gambling. If you're not willing to gamble you shouldn't play.

If JJ is not a GII here then the maniac description is incorrect. It's probably best not to describe villain as a maniac, but instead describe some hands that made OP think villain was a maniac and let us draw our own conclusions.

Based on 99% of people's conception of what it means to be a "maniac," this is a slam dunk GII and we're not even close to flipping vs. his range.

"Pick a better spot" doesn't make any sense, it's just how people justify risk aversion. We can take this spot AND get the better spot later.

Apparently, since it worked

I thought Poker was supposed to be a skill game? Hard to say since OP only said "maniac" but no examples/descriptions. He could be doing it with AK/AQ still an unnecessary risk.


Of course it makes sense especially when both are deep, if he's a maniac you can for sure find many other spots to take him down vs flipping here with 5 cards to come. This one is iffy and risk aversion is justified as I think it's silly to risk over 2 BIs unless your hunch is spot-on.

It's easy to be results-oriented.