7ish

I don't think this is some massive ejaculating fist-pump call, but I think it is a call. He's drinking at 1pm, he's shown serious aggression/fearlessness vs a whale, he's jamming his straddle vs what looks like a button iso from a reg. Also, this pot is playing shortstacked due to the straddle.

We could negate AA/KK from his range here as he may choose a smaller 3b sizing with those powerhouses.

It's $400 to win ~$945 so we need ~42% equity to BE. If we assign villain a range of 77-KK(half combos of KK), AK, AQ we have ~42% equity, and I think that's a pretty tight range for this villain. Add in anything else and our equity only rises from there.

Good point. I caught myself here with a little "2+2 bias" when I first thought about the hand, subliminally assuming Mike lost the hand to an unexpected AK and trying to go back in time and save him.

Still don't think its the arrogant "You're an idiot if you even think about folding," but think its a call nonetheless.

8.5

Two hands isn't really any sort of history but that said I just shrug call and hope to hold vs AJ

Two hands aren't a lot of history, but they were in one orbit, and I'm assuming this is not much farther into the game (same orbit or next, I hope, or we need more info).

Plus, it's a button raise of limpers vs. a straddle all-in for an effective <50bb. AQs is just too strong to fold here.

Im not sure where you ever got that idea but I doubt anyone who has seen me would describe me as even close to an OMC look. Quite the opposite actually.

This post needs some serious love!

Ha, I always thought you were retired (no?), and so I assumed old, so assumed like 50+ or maybe even 60+. If this isn't the case, then more reason to call.

GcluelessassumingnoobG

My personal opinion was that he has many more hands that I dominate than hands that dominate me so I called pretty quickly. Id put it at a 9 I think.

Board was KQ842. He had 99.

Yes, Im retired but Im not that old and I look a good deal younger than I am. I also have long hair.

This goes to 11 if you’re properly rolled for your game

grunch: 10. snap fist pump call not even close, we easily have the 43% equity we need against this guy who has plenty of ridiculous bluffs in his range.

I'm going to agree with this, even though Joey changed his mind. My initial response was 4, but I also might go a little higher, particularly if we are going to say variance truly doesn't matter at all to us.

My experience here, and I've even done it once or twice myself, is that Vs start off looking like maniacs and know it (this guy does seem aware), then the miracle happens and they get premium cards facing a raise at the perfect time, and they want to exploit their image.

So they figure just sticking it in as a big over bet looks like the crazy maniac thing to do and people are going to call them with 99+ AQ+ and in some cases less. Hands that might fold post. It's kind of a "go for gold" situation.

I wouldn't change the way I thought of the hand too much because of the straddle. Most Vs don't really think, "OK, we are now playing different stakes: 2/5/10" They think, "I'm putting my whole stack in."

Having said all that, I don't think a call is bad because there is a decent amount in the middle and you are 30% against even very strong ranges. And he could be more maniacal than he seems. Or, he could see this as a nice steal spot (your 6x doesn't look like AA or KK) that gives him the chance to solidify his crazy image.

From a results oriented point of view, isn't this the third HH that isn't exactly maniacal?

I'd be curious if you changed your opinion of your call rating based on how he played afterwards (although obviously you don't have that knowledge at the time).

Gnotexactlyseeingthemaniaceveryoneelseis,butmaybeI 'mmisreadingthingsG

v floated 65o on a wet board and overbet jammed a scare card.

v raised a stronger draw with a gutter and a BDFD and got a fold.

he's got enough evidence that some (or all) of the table is scared $.

against a relatively tight range of 88+, ATss+, AJo+, KQ suited and o/s we have 50% equity. we're getting better than 1.3-1 on a call so snapple.

wait wut?

After the hand he said "you really wanted to put it all in as a flip?". I said "nobody will ever accuse me of being afraid to put my chips in the middle". He turned around and walked off without saying another word. He didnt even finish his beer.

This...

and we wonder why you never get 100+BBs into the middle?

So what I conclude from this is he's hardly maniacal. This is simply another day at the office for maniacs, and they quickly get out another of 5 BIs burning a hole in their pocket, yell "chips!", order another beer, and away we go again. This guy doesn't have the stomach for that kind of variance, and plays a lot closer to the vest (although he's obviously not an OMC either).

Am I that far off on this read?

GIstandbymynon-maniacreadG

V is not the maniac the thread thinks he is.

I know this is results oriented bla-bla-bla, but at the end of the day, both players went in with top 3.5% hands, which is far more reasonable than the spewtard day drunk range some people want to assign to him.

Since we already put 6 straddles in, it's a clear call, ~8.5

In a vacuum (let's pretend we put 0 dollars in somehow), it's about a coinflip.

If your games have people who shovel $460 into the pot with 9s, good for you.

if he is jamming 99 here, he's got hands he'll jam that we crush.

so, yeah, your read is far off IMO

Super small sample, still for < 100 bbs in a straddled pot I'd rate it a 10. 42.6% equity vs. this guy makes it a snap call.

Of course its about a coin flip when he has 99. The question is how often will he have hands that I dominate like AJs/KQ vs how often will he have hands that dominate me like AK.

How is jamming 99 remotely maniacal suggesting there are hands we crush? For all we know it's the bottom of his range.

I've never played with a super aggro donk that goes home one orbit in / half way thru his beer after losing his first flip. That part simply doesn't add up at all.

ETA: But, I also don't mean to make it out like it's a bad call or anything, and I've already questioned whether he would do this with hands we really fear (other than AK). I'm fine with the call. Just don't think it's as fistpumpy as everyone thinks.

GcluelessmaniacnoobG

I wasnt clear. I just sat down and saw those 2 hands before this one came up. I have no idea how long he had been playing prior to that.