problem with tight table w/ 1 maniac

[ReyBiz]

Hi all,

A few days ago, playing live 1/1 euro stakes NLHE, I was facing the following problem.
Normally the cash games I play are full of loose/weak players and some LAG’s. Playing a solid TAG game will net me a nice profit most of the time.
This particular night was different though. I was facing a 9 handed table with 6 players left of me, varying from weak/tight to semi-aggressive/tight. Next to them sat a maniac who seemed to hit all the time, raising a lot PF, floating and reraising, and dominating the table. After him was a solid TAG player who didn’t seem to catch playable hands. I had big trouble adjusting my game here. My PF raises only made everyone without monster hands fold, and the super LAG player seemed to get the best of me all the time, pushing me into a weak-tight game I normally never play. Most of the time, he had position on me, and I never quite knew where I stood with my holdings (no physical tells).

1) How would you guys handle this situation? I know I should consider better table selection, but I want to be able to beat this kind of game too.
2) Should I shift to LAG play in this situation? Can anybody give me some good pointers or point me to a place to begin studying some LAG play against a weak tight table? (since I’m not use to play like this).
3) Should I start making stands against the maniac with weaker holdings like J9o? How do I crack his game on this table? Or should I just get out of his way?

Fyi I had a 70 eur stack left and the maniac had a mega stack (about 300 I guess). Other stacks where all around 100 eur.

[Donkenstein]

I find the only way to beat a player like this is to either wait for the nuts and try to trap or to play back at him. If someone is just trying to run over the top of me it usually comes down to a situation where I find myself thinking either I let him keep doing it and fold or I play back knowing I am prolly 60-40 behind at best. Sometimes you just gotta take a chance.

Another point is you let him take you off your game which is never a good idea. From the sounds of it he was trying to make everyone play weak-tight and you did just that. IMO you either gotta step up the aggression or stand up and walk away from the table in a situation like that.

[pzhon]

Poker is a battle for the dead money. When everyone plays tightly (rare), the main source of dead money may be the blinds. In other games, the main source of dead money may be bad limps in early position and bad calls of raises. When there is a maniac at the table, the main source of dead money may be the maniac. If so, then generally, you don't want to chase the maniac out of the pot, and you should either learn how to beat him (which is much harder out of position than in position), or else find another game.

With stacks that short, out of position, you can limp-reraise, check-raise, and slow play a lot. If he floats a lot of flops, you can fire second barrels with nothing more frequently, and check-raise the turn more frequently. Don't wait until you have hands that would be strong enough to do this against a passive player's bets and raises, but which hands you use should depend on how he reacts to your aggression. An aggressive player who bets has a much wider range than a passive player, which means much more of the time a hand like TPGK or a pair between top pair and second pair or even just ace high will be good against him, and it is much less likely that he will have a quality draw if one is possible. Accept that sometimes he will have a hand and you will get your money in with the worst of it.

For example, when you have AQo or 99 in EP, try limping to induce a raise from the maniac. If he makes it 8 to go most of the time, try reraising to 30, then pushing any flop whether you hit or not. It's very hard for him to find a profitable way to play against that on average to recover from raising too often and too much. If he folds preflop, you win 10 with hands are are normally worth about the blinds, and if he mistakenly calls, you average even more.

Don't forget that missed overcards have about 25% equity on the flop against a low pair, and more with a backdoor flush draw or backdoor straight draw, and your hand is often still good. If you put even 1/3 of your stack in preflop with AQ (even less against a maniac), you should be willing to put the rest in on most flops.

After you double up, you may have to play differently. Someone whose flop and turn play may be maniacal may not be a maniac in large pots on the river.

[lucky_mf]

[ QUOTE ]
I was facing a 9 handed table with 6 players left of me, varying from weak/tight to semi-aggressive/tight. Next to them sat a maniac who seemed to hit all the time, raising a lot PF, floating and reraising, and dominating the table. After him was a solid TAG player who didn’t seem to catch playable hands. I had big trouble adjusting my game here. My PF raises only made everyone without monster hands fold, and the super LAG player seemed to get the best of me all the time, pushing me into a weak-tight game I normally never play. Most of the time, he had position on me, and I never quite knew where I stood with my holdings (no physical tells).

[/ QUOTE ]

If he is sitting 7 spaces to your left in a 9-handed game he should not have position on you often unless you are playing your BB against his button.

[ QUOTE ]
How would you guys handle this situation? I know I should consider better table selection, but I want to be able to beat this kind of game too.

[/ QUOTE ]

I typically tighten up and try to play hands when I have a positional advantage. For example, I would not be calling in the BB just because he is loose on the button.

[ QUOTE ]
Should I shift to LAG play in this situation? Can anybody give me some good pointers or point me to a place to begin studying some LAG play against a weak tight table? (since I’m not use to play like this).

[/ QUOTE ]

This is probably the worst thing you can do. Although a LAG approach works best against weak tight opponents, it is probably not the best approach versus a super LAG.

[ QUOTE ]
Should I start making stands against the maniac with weaker holdings like J9o? How do I crack his game on this table? Or should I just get out of his way?

[/ QUOTE ]

Play tight and punish him when he gets out of line and you actually have a pat hand (like top pair decent kicker). There are different kinds of laggy players and maniacs. I actually think it is pretty pointless trying to bluff a pure maniac. His mistake is playing too many hands, too aggressively. The way to exploit this is to make a hand get paid off - either by value betting and having him call you down light or by letting him bluff his chips off to you. You should observe his play and see which strategy is likely to work better.

If he can fold a hand, then you may try to bluff him. You just have to be careful to come up with a realistic line as he is probably pretty accustomed to people trying to bluff him.

Lucky

[ReyBiz]

Thanks for your replies. I'm going to review the session and see if i could have played my hands differently.

Also, Lucky, idd i'm wrong about the position, i made a mix up because most pots i played against him that session happened to be oop for me.

So actually what you are saying is, since there is already a super LAG at the table, it's no use playing more LAG myself, even if most other players are playing very tightly?

Donkenstein: Idd one of the biggest mistakes i made that session was not playing my usual game. Normally, i like to be the aggressor in most pots i enter.

phzon: Your post gave me a lot to think over, ty

[lucky_mf]

[ QUOTE ]
So actually what you are saying is, since there is already a super LAG at the table, it's no use playing more LAG myself, even if most other players are playing very tightly?

[/ QUOTE ]

It just depends what type of player he is. If he is a very good super aggro player, then it is probably best to pick your spots. If he is bad, but cannot be bluffed, then you also need to have a hand to play with him. If he is capable of laying down a rand you can play with him a little, but this will be a high variance.

Against a typical maniac I would be trying to play pots in position. If I had position I would re-raise for value pre-flop a fair amount and I would bluff sparingly. Basically, I would be content to not fight or to lose small battles with the aim of winning the war.

Lucky

[ReyBiz]

I'd say he was a decent aggro player, but he got a little carried away since the table was so tight/weak. Later on the TAG player to my right punished him in a decent pot, actually bluffing him with a big reraise, which made me realize i could have done this in a few other spots earlier on.

By that time my stack was 30-40ish and high variance moves felt out of the question.