Villain - Maniac / Lag player type and the best thing to happen since sliced bread. In 2 hours I watched him spin up a stack to $1,500.00 and then lose it all + (2) additional buy ins. Villain is currently stuck and has no plans of slowing down or playing "better". If you are in a hand with him, buckle up. He creates action every pot he is in and his decisions make 0 sense. He is the type to 3 bet you post flop with bottom pair just because.

Hero - my overall strategy was simple. Tighten up my range and be willing to call down lighter.

It is 3am and stacks are relatively deep for a 1/3 game.

The main villain (maniac) is the effective stack with roughly $750.00

OTH.......

V1 (UTG) - raises $15.00

V2 (MP) - calls $15.00

Hero (BTN) - calls $15.00 88

V3 (BB) "Maniac" - 3 bets to $30.00 - This was standard for him except when was nutted his sizing would be larger. He just likes juicing up the pot.

V1 (UTG) - calls $30.00

V2 (MP) - calls $30.00

Hero (BTN) - calls $30.00

Pot = $120.00

Flop - 244

V3 (BB) - cbets $50.00

Folds around to hero on the button

Hero (BTN) - calls $50.00

Is raising this board vs this player type ever optimal?

Pot = $220.00

Turn - 6

V3 (BB) - sizes up to $150.00 w/ roughly $475.00 behind

Hero (BTN) - calls $150.00

Pot = $520.00

River - J

V3 (BB) - rips the remaining $475.00

Hero (BTN) - ?????

I’d prob call against this player type, that said its going to be high variance but you didn’t call the turn to fold the river ��

Raise turn and show if he folds. Pick stronger hands to go into call down mode with vs maniacs.

As played I think after the turn, the river is close to even money decision no matter what you choose. Perhaps ever so slightly better to call with infinitely higher variance.

My first thought was to backraise big PF after he 3-bet and no one 4-bet in front of you.

I snap call the river AP. I probably look to get it AI on the flop or turn if I have a Ugh confidence he will oblige.

I think you played fine on all streets now call river.

Not really sure which rivers we could fold on , maybe an overcard club?

It's hard to make a hand in Hold'em.

I agree that playing a tighter range against this player type makes sense, but you also need to have a lot of buy ins in your pocket to play properly against them and
to be prepared to go to war with them pre and on all streets, where the correct strategy is to do so.

With the above in mind, I agree with another poster that we're better off raising the turn here.

His hand feels like two over cards, a FD, or maybe a combo of both.

I think we're playing a bit scared here by just flatting the turn, given that his range is not that strong based on your analysis that when he min raises pre to juice
the pot up, that his range is wide.

If he shows up on the river here with a random 4x hand then that's more evidence that you need to play more aggressively pre, 3 bet and 4 bet more against him/her.

I think overall what's happening is that you are letting him/her scare you at all stages and they are therefore being able to dictate the game flow and put you in tough spots.

Against this player type you need to try to put them in tough spots from time to time, to gain the initiative away from them.

If you don't have multiple reloads available per session, which is fair enough, then it's advisable IMO to either sit out of this game with him/her in it,
or to tighten up even more pre and look to either get it in with him/her pre, or make the pots very big pre so that the SPR is low and he/she can't then
do any BS bullying on the streets. The hands will play themselves and you having a way stronger range will mean you will be profitable.

These type of aggro LAG bullying players are a common feature everywhere, and in PLO cash too. What you have to do IMO is come up with a counter strategy,
and not to play your regular game, because they are using a playing style that will upset your regular game and often make it quite ineffective.

River, you’re flipping a coin, I really don’t think either decision matters much.

When you have 8s on the button and everyone before you had just called Maniac’s min-3-bet, you should be 4-betting, HUGE. You want to either get heads-up with position and a good hand as the aggressor in a big pot against a Maniac, or—just take it down preflop. There’s 30 BBs out there!

I get that he’s a Maniac and you want to wait for a big hand and then just call down as he bluffs into you, and I’m fine with that if you’re holding AA or KK. But with anything else, what you want to do is take the aggression BACK from him. Hyper-aggro players HATE this. They’re used to guys playing super passive against them, waiting to hit huge, but otherwise letting the Maniac decide how big the pot is gonna be. Don’t fall into that trap! The way to beat Maniacs is to 3- and 4-bet them, forcing them on the defense.

I’d have raised pre, and if I hadn’t raised pre I’d have raised the flop. Once you decided not to do either of those things, I guess the best option is to just call down the Turn and any River and pray you’re good. But I don’t like this strategy AT ALL.

Maybe its just me but I feel like with maniacs like this you have to realize pre flop that your likely playing for stacks. If 88 is something your comfortable with than I would re raise pre and try to isolate the maniac. Me personally 88 is not something I'm willing to go to battle with in a cash game. I'm probably calling to flop a set. If I miss I'm probably letting it go. I would rather get it in with AA KK QQ AK.

a couple things to consider are 1) would this "maniac" continue to bet with nothing on the turn or river. and also 2) would this maniac bluff you. What I've seen over time is that maniac's won't bluff (either pre flop or post flop) against certain players. That being said on the flop I'm not folding and on the turn I'm also not folding. You could have raised the flop or turn, as played if I was in this spot I would tell myself on the river as long as there is no A, K, Q, or 3 for the 1 card straight I am calling. but I would also know that he's gonna show up here with a 4, 35 for the straight, and even the old J5. I was in a similar hand a while back versus a "maniac" and the thing is on the river he moved all in because he had hit a backdoor flush but the river card gave me a set to make a boat (it was a paired board on the flop). After this hand I realized that even maniacs at some point play straight up and will have a hand especially against players they view as tight. Its close but even then I had told myself as long as the river is not an A, K, or Q I am calling (because I was never putting him on a back door flush and I also wasn't putting him on flopped trips). Spots like these are what bankrolls are for, pay the guy off, take the information you paid for and adjust. Good luck.

Thanks everyone for the input.

Hero called the river........

Not sure why you didn't raise pre the first time? Or, why you didn't backraise?

The rest is fine vs. this player type.

A most instructive hand. We can't wait for premium hands cards to go up against a maniac. As played, I like the flop and the turn. No idea how to play the river, I hope you have a bankroll. The mistake is preflop.

Crucially, what is the range of villain 1? After he calls the maniac's minimum raise, he's not on a premium pair or AK. If he's an aggressive player, he is raising, not calling, with 99+ and AK. Calling shows weakness. When villain 2 calls, that suggests a weaker pair than 88 or Broadway cards too. What is your read of villain 2? I see the merit of set-mining a maniac, but what to do when you don't hit your set? My view is you're ahead here most of the time. So after the minimum raise by the maniac, I'm making a pot-sized bet and looking to scoop the pot most of the time. Maniacs lose their money with aggression but don't commit suicide by calling pot-sized bets after making minimum raises. If the maniac re-raises all in pre, I'm tossing 88. I'm agreeing with the others that the best way to play the maniac, especially when he makes a mistake like minimum raising, is with aggression.

The unknown in the hand are villains 1 and 2. Any reads?

Giving V description the question becomes are you ahead of a random hand as his bets have no meaning. You are so you call.

You think, calling pre is correct? Everyone is saying passive play here is a mistake.

I rarely play against a random player. I always have at least a hypothetical read. Most players reveal their mistakes within a few orbits

I dont mind flatting this pre, if we do 4bet we would have to assume everyone besides maniac folds which isn’t 100% likely

Also if we do 4bet this , it means we are flatting the single raise with all our strong hands too in this spot.

That's why the play depends on the reads of villain 1 and villain 2.

2 out of 3 players in my casino are loose passive, revealed early in the orbit by limping too much. With what hand does a loose passive villain 1 raise in early position? Overvalued Axs hands, high broadway, pairs JJ+, maybe 99+, lot players limp with low pairs and limp widely, so the raising range early is narrow, no fancy stuff. Does the loose passive have 99, TT, and JJ and is afraid to raise the maniac? Does the loose passive raise with QQ? In the end it doesn't matter. A call after the maniac's raise is weak, if a villain raises early, calls a minimum raise, and then calls a large raise...that kind of play is passive, and the villain over many trials loses a lot of money. If v 1 just bought for 100 in 20 dollar bills, I'm raising every time. Same goes for villain 2.

How loose, how passive remains the unknown. But there are no random hands in poker, only players whose attention misfocus away from the players.

A pot-sized raise by the hero pre, if called by anyone, sets up a low SPR situation on the flop, with an easier decision than the one hero found himself in this hand. To a re-raise by the maniac, I'm folding 88 and joining him in the hospital, thankful I have a bankroll because some crazy people are smarter than I.

Just saw the results, OP. Nice hand. It takes steady nerves to call down a maniac!