|
|
#21
10-02-2007, 03:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ace baby in the blinds vs a maniac..... how to play?
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think the reverse implied odds of hitting an A are necessarily that bad. [/ QUOTE ] sorry, but i completely disagree with this statement. Maniac will go hard on an ace high flop if he has an ace. We only have A5 - how many times do you think we're going to be good here? 
|
|
#23
10-02-2007, 04:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ace baby in the blinds vs a maniac..... how to play?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I don't think the reverse implied odds of hitting an A are necessarily that bad. [/ QUOTE ] sorry, but i completely disagree with this statement. Maniac will go hard on an ace high flop if he has an ace. We only have A5 - how many times do you think we're going to be good here? [/ QUOTE ] >50% I wouldn´t worry too much about being dominated, he is going to pound bottom pair like it is the nuts. You just have to avoid doing something really silly like raise/folding A high flops or folding the river to a big bet after calling flop and turn.
|
|
#24
10-02-2007, 04:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ace baby in the blinds vs a maniac..... how to play?
[ QUOTE ]
You have a 20/15/3 image, and maniac is a classic 50/30/5. The table folds around. Scenario A) You are in SB with A5o, action? Plan? Scenario B) You are in BB with A5o and maniac raises to 4BB, plan? [ QUOTE ] How deep are we? How many hands do we have to determine his PT stats? How is the rest of the table responding to him (e.g., are they playing back at him or is it essentially one player shoving chips around while everyone else waits for their Aces to call him?). What are the stakes? [/ QUOTE ] Lets say 25NL, stats are over 100 hands we are 100BB deep and Maniac covers. [/ QUOTE ] So I think in both scenarios we are either barely beating or coin flipping his range. Based upon this I believe that we can either fold or raise. I do not believe that calling is a good option in either case. LOGIC FOR FOLDING: We are marginal. We can wait for better spots than this and can hopefully get paid off when we are more comfortable that we have the best of it. Also, if we do call or raise we have the headache of not knowing what to do when the flop comes 752 and we face aggression. If we face aggression in that situation we have a tough decision in that we are ahead of his range in either scenario, but putting in money with a hand that is either beaten or subject to heavy redraws. LOGIC FOR RAISING: If we are raising here then I think that we are doing it largely for information on how to play this specific maniac in later hands. We want to determine how villain reacts to resistance and we want to do it when we are ahead of his range. Do I wish I had AK or QQ here? Sure, but we want to gather information to know how better to attack him in the future. One thing we need to understand here is that we may lose money short term versus this player, playing back at him for information, but our goal is to win much more in the future. We also want to see just how maniacal he truly is – does he have complete disregard for his chips in some glorious attempt to increase the size of his e-peen or is he simply bullying everyone around in hopes of creating action so that some donkey pays off his whacky two pair or over pair when they make TPTK. If we are raising Scenario A we need to knock it up to 5-6BB. If we decide to raise up Scenario B, we should repop him to say 12-15BB (assuming that he is raising from SB as you stated in a previous post). We want to see his reaction in Scenario B to our raise. Do we expect a call? Yes. Do we expect a raise? Possibly, but we want to see what he does when faced with some level of resistance (e.g., is he a smart maniac or a dumb maniac). As stated before we would love to be doing this with AK rather than A5, but I believe that A5 is ahead often enough to make this slightly +EV (as long as we play well postflop) – the trick here is that we want to see how willing villain is to relinquish control in the face of real resistance. THINGS TO BE COGNIZANT OF: So the above are my thoughts in a vacuum. There are a lot of things that can influence the above decisions and these are information/observation that we should take into account: 1. Villain’s hand sample size is small and there is the potential that his play is the result of a good run of cards/luck. This can be difficult to ascertain if Villain is not going to many showdowns. 2. We need to determine what Villain thinks is a strong hand. Is he the type that takes his middle or low pair to the felt even with an Ace on the board? If he is not then I think that A5o loses value. 3. Where does Villain’s aggression end? What are his AF on the Flop/Turn/River? If he pushes hard early and then slows down on later streets then playing A5o becomes a little more palatable as we are not risking our entire stack with a marginal hand. 4. How does he react to aggression from others? If we hit our Ace in Scenario B and he is simply going to fold to a flop raise when we hit our A, or check/fold the turn after trying to knock us off at the flop? So these are my thoughts. All in all, if I am playing these hands I probably lean for a fold and hope to get my reads while others risk their chips, but dependent upon how the table treats him that may not work. As I stated before I am writing this from work, so hopefully I do not have any huge contradictions and I got my points across. I definitely welcome any comments from other posters as I am certainly no pro, and just because I take a line does not mean it is not a leak.
|
|
#25
10-02-2007, 04:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ace baby in the blinds vs a maniac..... how to play?
id fold both,
in SB we are obv gona play OOP and he obv is gona either 3bet or call most of the time given the situation. 3bets we have to fold. If he call we whiff and cbet, this type of villian most the time either floats or shows aggro on flop which we have to fold to in almost all cases. And if we do hit TP its gona be tough to play if we do face any aggression. If villian just calls down we most likely will show weakness on 1 of the streets and this type of villian usually exploits that and that just puts us in gay spots. Basically you cant really play this hand for value OOP IMO. in BB, so we do have position but this guy is probably gona cbet a whole lot of flops so I dont like a call cause we arent goin to hit often enough to make up for all the times we have to just fold the flop. And when we do hit since villian is super aggro he is gona put us in a tough spot when we hold only TPCK. maybe my thinkin on this is bad??
|
|
#26
10-02-2007, 04:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ace baby in the blinds vs a maniac..... how to play?
[ QUOTE ]
id fold both, in SB we are obv gona play OOP and he obv is gona either 3bet or call most of the time given the situation. 3bets we have to fold. If he call we whiff and cbet, this type of villian most the time either floats or shows aggro on flop which we have to fold to in almost all cases. And if we do hit TP its gona be tough to play if we do face any aggression. If villian just calls down we most likely will show weakness on 1 of the streets and this type of villian usually exploits that and that just puts us in gay spots. Basically you cant really play this hand for value OOP IMO. in BB, so we do have position but this guy is probably gona cbet a whole lot of flops so I dont like a call cause we arent goin to hit often enough to make up for all the times we have to just fold the flop. And when we do hit since villian is super aggro he is gona put us in a tough spot when we hold only TPCK. maybe my thinkin on this is bad?? [/ QUOTE ] imo, fwiw, is that folding here can not be bad as we are either a coin flip or slightly +EV here. The only spot I think where we have an issue is if we hit a monster - A5X, 55X, we have the potential to make 100BB if villain is maniacal enough to pay us off. I just don't know that we can say that with the information that we have. If I remember correctly, we are like a 25:1 dog to flop two pair and a 60'ish:1 dog to flop trips. In Scenario A we are OOP, so extracting value will be more difficult (albeit the maniac may extract it for us), and in Scenario B if we hit and get doubled through we are getting implied odds of 25:1, so maybe looking to double through is -EV here? Anyone see it differently?
|
|
#27
10-02-2007, 04:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ace baby in the blinds vs a maniac..... how to play?
[ QUOTE ]
he is going to pound bottom pair like it is the nuts. [/ QUOTE ] i also disagree with this unless he's completely retarded (most maniacs are not retarded)
|
|
#28
10-02-2007, 04:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ace baby in the blinds vs a maniac..... how to play?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] he is going to pound bottom pair like it is the nuts. [/ QUOTE ] i also disagree with this unless he's completely retarded (most maniacs are not retarded) [/ QUOTE ] Right, we need to have more information here to make these types of decisions. I think a better statement would have been "We should call if he is going to pound bottom pair like it is the nuts" rather than assuming that this is necessarily true.
|
|
#29
10-02-2007, 04:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ace baby in the blinds vs a maniac..... how to play?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] he is going to pound bottom pair like it is the nuts. [/ QUOTE ] i also disagree with this unless he's completely retarded (most maniacs are not retarded) [/ QUOTE ] We're not saying he's a good LAG. He's a guy with 50/30/5 stats. So either he's bombing tons of streets with nothing on a regular basis, or he's shutting down and not going anywhere postflop without a solid hand, which means he's doing nothing on the vast majority of flops because he's so goddamn loose PF. Either way, that's pretty exploitable, because A5 is well ahead of his PF range. If he isn't getting involved without a good hand, then you take the pot with a bet on an early street. If he will bluff or bet weak hands a ton, then calling down with an A is perfectly legit. [ QUOTE ] Right, we need to have more information here to make these types of decisions. I think a better statement would have been "We should call if he is going to pound bottom pair like it is the nuts" rather than assuming that this is necessarily true. [/ QUOTE ] If this isn't true, then he's missing a huge number of flops and doing nothing (because he's not calling very often) and you'll take down the pot hugely often postflop. Either way this is a good proposition.
|
|
#30
10-02-2007, 04:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ace baby in the blinds vs a maniac..... how to play?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] he is going to pound bottom pair like it is the nuts. [/ QUOTE ] i also disagree with this unless he's completely retarded (most maniacs are not retarded) [/ QUOTE ] We're not saying he's a good LAG. He's a guy with 50/30/5 stats. So either he's bombing tons of streets with nothing on a regular basis, or he's shutting down and not going anywhere postflop without a solid hand, which means he's doing nothing on the vast majority of flops because he's so goddamn loose PF. Either way, that's pretty exploitable, because A5 is well ahead of his PF range. If he isn't getting involved without a good hand, then you take the pot with a bet on an early street. If he will bluff or bet weak hands a ton, then calling down with an A is perfectly legit. [ QUOTE ] Right, we need to have more information here to make these types of decisions. I think a better statement would have been "We should call if he is going to pound bottom pair like it is the nuts" rather than assuming that this is necessarily true. [/ QUOTE ] If this isn't true, then he's missing a huge number of flops and doing nothing (because he's not calling very often) and you'll take down the pot hugely often postflop. Either way this is a good proposition. [/ QUOTE ] So my preflop ranging sucks - what do we think his range is in both scenarios?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
