Thought this one might generate some discussion due to an extra wrinkle in the usual decision making process.

UTG is a rich older maniac, and is currently cross booking with three people in the game (hero, UTG+1 and the highjack).

UTG+1 (cross booking with UTG) is a winning regular, but plays a little passive.

Maniac opens, winning reg cold calls, passive fish calls, folds to hero on the button with KJo (cross booking with UTG). Blinds are both almost 100% to call if we flat, and may even come along if we 3! (it's that kind of game).

Call/Raise/Fold? I considered all options and got varying responses from some other players I asked. Should the cross booking aspect factor in at all? What weight do you give to the fact that UTG+1 just flats the maniac open even while booking with him.

Call > Fold >> 3bet

Seems like a really straightforward call.

Yep, call and see a flop in position. Enjoy the show.

Explain this crossbook business.

Where is this game located?

Just don't fold is the kicker IMO

Are the other players aware of the cross-booking?

I guess this comes down to how weak are the blinds post-flop.. combined with the maniac hero can justify flatting a very wide range on the btn

Aside from that, I think cross-book should encourage more conservative decisions from hero, after passive player flats I am expecting a range disadvantage and think kjo is more of a trap hand than a value hand given how it plays postflop

It also depends on how much you're cross-booking. 100% share the winnings is different as far as the calculations are concerned, than 1% shares of each other (somewhat negligible).

It's also worth noting as I'm sure everyone is aware, cross-booking is unethical, immoral, very bad for the game, and leprosy for your reputation. The logical consequence of any cross-booking is collusion.

crossbooking is often bad for the game but its certainly not unethical. Its not bad because its collusion but its bad because one of the players (or both) ofetn ends up playing tighter (and by default better) preflop

Its the opposite, UTG+! pro has a **** box when he cant isolate the UTG maniac that he's crossbooking with. most likely has a hand he wants to flop big with multiways and then can isolate maniac on flop, small pairs most likely then the 9Ts stuff, near impossible to have any hands that dominate our KJ and if passive player didn't cold call I would lean towards a pre flop 3 bet

All players were booking with maniac at 100%

Yes, anyone who is paying the slightest amount of attention is aware of it. I would guess that of the remaining 5 players, 3 of are fully aware of what is happening.

I'm curious why you think cross booking is so toxic leaves, in this case the maniac is going to play pretty much the same no matter what (occasionally he tightens up a little for brief periods, but he will almost always go on tilt and give it back)

I would leave the game.

But if I crossed booked with the maniac, clear easy re raise assuming I can out play him after the flop.

The game you describe, if you can afford the variance, I'm getting as much money in preflop as I possibly can with any reasonable holding.

This assumes you are an expert player post flop and not just check calling q-j-3 flops. Sometimes you fold, sometimes you cap.

Two people who are cross-booking with each other already have less incentive to try to win each other's money, which thwarts the objective of poker. They have incentive to play with each other for other people's money, and it affects the game play.

For example, A and B both have 50% of each other. C and D are aware that A and B both have 50% of each other. The pot is 10BB. All the cards are out, and it's limit poker. A has a strong hand and leads. B can now raise on a bluff knowing A led into three people and likely has a strong hand. And, this would purely be an EV decision. C now needs to worry about facing a cap just to see if their hand is strong enough to win. It certainly changes things. Now, think of the same problem, but only 15%. You'll still see that B has more incentive to bluff. A winning the pot is still a 15% win for B, and visa versa. Of course, A winning the pot is only an 85% win for A. But C and D have no such insurance policy if they lose the pot, and are hence at a disadvantage. They can only win by playing the best strategy for themselves. If you're trying to maximize profit while cross-booking, you're colluding even IF other players are fully aware and ignorant at math.

I think I took the passive description of villain a little too far, if he is always raising 99+/aq+/ajs+ you are right that call is fine

Even though I still think labeling kjo a trap hand is accurate the combination of hot/cold equity + btn + maniac spewing 1+bigbet post routinely? Calling should be a tiny mistake at worst

I've never cross-booked so this post makes me appreciate how it really lead players to tighten up in a lot of spots / assume a different pyschology
Here even though calling kjo is objectively fine my fear would be flatting this kind of marginal hand is descending into playing a (less profitable) more maniac style when the cross-book could otherwise encourage me to try to alter my normal play to reduce variance - losing a big multiway pot to the crossbooker with the extra action would also feel much worse so I might assess it more strictly/tightly in this spot

Xpost:

Leaves it sounds like you are describing 'swapping' which is not the same as cross-booking

Waste of a lot of words, cross-booking is not what you think it is.

Yes you are correct. My mistake.

Your objections make more sense now.

Just to clarify for anyone else that is confused, cross booking is a sort of side bet where you both agree to pay the difference at the end of the session or time period. For example:

Player A and player B agree to cross book at 100% for 2 hours. They are playing 20/40 limit and both start with $1000. At the end of the 2 hours, player A has $1400 and player B has $500. In this scenario, player B would owe player A the difference of $900. So player B has not only lost $500 in the game, but also $900 in the side bet.

The reason I thought this was slightly interesting was because assuming the pot ends up heads up with the maniac (who hero is cross booking with at 100%) the game goes from 20/40 to 60/120 as every chip hero gains and maniac loses is tripled due to the cross book. The fact that the UTG player (also cross booking) chose to cold call instead of three bet also changes things a lot, as some people pointed out.

Where is this game?

I️ think it’s Seattle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk