Been playing at this table for about two hours. I have not been running well at all, and am down about $500 at a $300 max table. I've also been playing slightly below my C-game so far at this table, but I managed to move to a different seat at the table where I could have direct position on two crazy ass maniacs who were raising and re-raising and bluffing like crazy and showing their bluffs and laughing about it and generally acting like jackasses.

Anyway, the guy in question is generally speaking, a terrible player, but has been running like god and has the most unfounded pompous confidence in the casino, let alone at the table. He'd do things like raise 7 limpers to $5, or open-shove a Flop with three hearts, and when everyone folds he'd laugh his ass off and show us 9-5 off-suit, both cards black. He'd got really lucky by busting another insane psycho at the table when both of them went crazy by bluffing each other, this guy with A7o and the other guy with pocket 5's on a K93 rainbow board, somehow they both got all in, and this guy spiked a 7 on the turn and took it down, and the other guy left the table (and I took his seat).

At any rate, he was involved in most pots, but he wasn't going all-out crazy every single hand, either. I was determined to beat him, and so I had opened up my starting range to just about any two cards I could get in with him, just hoping I could catch a decent flop and have him bluff all his money off to me. That said, I was not in the best state of mind, I shouldn't have been playing, but I was on tilt and didn't, and so I ran into this awkward situation.

I get dealt J5 in the CO. There's a couple of limpers, crazy guy raises to $5, and so I call and a few other guys call, but not the button so I've got position on the hand.

Flop is KQK.

Checks to crazy guy, who bets $15 into $23. We both have about $350 in our stacks, so I call. Everyone else folds.

Turn is the 2.

Crazy guy bets $30 into $53. I thought about raising right here, to build a pot, but I was afraid the guy might have nothing, and I didn't want to raise him while he held 6-high and just have him fold while I'm sitting on a flush. So I called.

River is 5.

Crazy guy bets $125 into $113.

I should note, that while I had seen the guy go a bit crazy on random flops, I had never seen him take this exact line before, where he bets fairly sanely on flop and turn and then overbets the river.

He's got about $175 left over in his stack.

The situation I was faced with, was, typically, given the paired board, and the small possibility for an Ace-high flush, this seems like a fairly standard call. But given the player, the fact that he had done lots of crazy unpredictable crap all night, and the fact that he just didn't seem like a particularly competent player, is this a time where I should be willing to take the gamble that maybe he's got something and would be willing to call down with worse, and shove? It seems like if he has a King, he'll never fold here. Given the fact that he's playing 95% of his hands, there are a lot of ways he can have a King that doesn't have a full house here, and even if he only has a Queen there might be some way he can talk himself into a call (though I'll admit it's less likely).

So, should I be happy to shove this, and if I lose, then whatever? Or should I play it much more cautiously and just call, since just because he's a maniac doesn't mean that he's got to have a worse hand? Tricky spot!

Seems like you figured it out yourself

edit: I also fold preflop and raise turn but that's not really what you're asking.

Maniac raising a tight guy and maniac calling a tight guy shove are nowhere near the same unless it's a drunk maniac.

All you really have is a bluff catcher and you shouldn't shove for value. You think he's going to look at K4 and say, "Yes there's a flush out there and yes you would only play better kings than me but I'm still going to put all of my money into the pot against you the tight guy". I'm only about 65% convinced that you even have the best hand.

Why on earth would we ever raise turn vs a maniac that loves to bluff shove???

One of my pet peeves on 2+2 is that people come in and post hands in which they lost and they try to find some way they could have gotten away from it.

Against the player you describe, there is absolutely positively no way you can ever "get away" from a big hand and read him for the nuts. His range is too wide and his bluff frequency is too high.

The way you own maniacs like this is to become a calling station whenever you have middle pair or better NO MATTER HOW SCARY THE BOARD GETS.

So a flush vs this players is like the nuts.

We want to call down so he keeps bluffing and then on river we can raise him and if this is the one time he has the nuts, meh, so be it.

Can he call with worse? This is really more your read based on table play.

I think the described V calls with most kings here so I'd have to get it in.

Also, don't raise the turn, you may be costing yourself a river bet exactly like this one.

Yeah, that was my thought. Normally I'd raise the turn to build a pot, or depending on the player I might just flat the turn since my hand is far from the nuts, but then again against a different player I'd never have paid money to see a flop with J5s!

It's just such an awkward spot. I can't ever be certain I have the best hand here. 65% to have the best hand here (as BradleyT suggested) sounds about right to me. If I shove, I'm only liable to get called by AA or some random queen like 5% of the time, but I think I get called by any King 100% of the time. He also calls all flushes, and folds everything else 99% of the time. But I just don't know if the math works out to this being a profitable shove.

Well the advantage of raising turn is that you have to raise somewhere to get the stacks in and I think his range for continuing against said raise will be wider on the turn than on the river: your hand doesn't look as strong, and he might be inclined to continue with a single spade. Ideally a guy this crazy will shove over you with the bare As (or call and bluffshove the river when he misses) or something similarly stupid; if he managed to get it all in A7 vs 55, who knows. Also if another spade/Q/2 hits on the river it will kill your action and/or hand. But it is true that raising the turn might cost you a bet if he would have folded to any raise but would continue betting on the river if you flat, so calling is good too. I think it's pretty close imo.

If his range here is wide you're ahead of a lot of his flushes, which helps tilt the lean to shove. He has to have the ace of spades to be beating you.

Yeah tbh I think the turn is a much more interesting street to discuss than the river. There's no way I'm not shoving river as played.

I don't really agree with this. I think we can comfortably raise river all-in to almost any bet; it's not like we need to juice the pot on the turn.

And, I think a turn raise looks just as strong. The front door draw just hit and we're trying to shovel chips in. What is he going to put us on?

First of all and most importantly u said something along the lines of u loosened ur range up pre and was trying to get involved with this manic. At these limits thats totally unnecessary let him beat himself by playing premium hand against him although u said u knew u weren't playing ur a or even b game so maybe u knew that n just didn't care

I agree Rumor...

This is why maniacs do so well against people.

All day the maniac shoves and bluffs and shoves and their villains fold/fold/fold "waiting for a better spot".

Then, finally, their villain gets a hand and can't wait to raise the maniac and bully back some, so they raise and then the maniac stops bluffing and folds...

I will say it again. Why on god's green Earth do we want to raise the turn vs a player with this insane of a bluff frequency and wide range???

If villain was a super calling station then absolutely raise turn. But against a spewtarded aggro bluffing machine??? Raising when you are strong just costs yourself money...

Meh, in position it's ok to loosen the range here if you do it with a purpose to hit or fold the flop when you're reasonably deep and the price is cheap vs. this type of villain.

Well, dmark, it was more like I was worried that if I just sat around waiting for premium hands he'd lose all his money to somebody else before I got one. I sat down directly in position of two maniacs, specifically so that I could open up my range and play more hands with them. Is this the wrong kind of thinking? Serious question.

I know there's a general theory strategy that goes something like: "if your opponent is playing loose, you should tighten up your range, if they're playing tight, you should loosen up your range". I think that's generally decent enough advice, but I don't think that applies to players who are so loose and aggressive that you're likely to get a lot of money any time you hit top pair or better (or even middle or bottom pair). Maybe my thinking on this is flawed, and if so, somebody please point it out. But my general strategy here is to try and see as many cheap flops as I can, develop a strong hand post-flop and then take all his money.

I see y'all's point re:turn (heh). I still think raising the turn has some merits (he can continue on a draw/he can put you on a draw/there are a lot of bad river cards), but you've done a good job of convincing me that a call might be better.

You're right, and I'd go as far as to say that the aphorism is bad precisely because it is too general. But J5s is just taking things a little too far imo. Stick to reasonable speculative hands (like ones that can at least theoretically make a straight) and more importantly, open up your value raising/3-betting range. Lots of broadways and AT style hands will be way ahead of his range (both for raising and calling raises/3-bets) and you don't need to wait for a flop before pressing that advantage.