A Hand from "How Good Is Your Limit Hold'em"

[colgin]

Here is a hand paraphrased from HGIYLH.

8 handed $20/40 online game. You raise black 9's in the CO. Button is a weak player who is loose both pre- and post-flop. Button cold calls. BB, a maniac, raises from the BB. We are told that although BB is a maniac he has reasonable pre-flop standards and may merely be three-betting with hands that are usually call-worthy. Hero and Button call.

9.5 SBs.

Flop: J [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] J [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 3 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

Maniac bets, you raise, Button cold calls. Maniac now three bets and both Hero and button call.

9 BB's.

Turn: 4 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Maniac bets. What's your plan?

[ILOVEPOKER929]

[ QUOTE ]
Here is a hand paraphrased from HGIYLH.

8 handed $20/40 online game. You raise black 9's in the CO. Button is a weak player who is loose both pre- and post-flop. Button cold calls. BB, a maniac, raises from the BB. We are told that although BB is a maniac he has reasonable pre-flop standards and may merely be three-betting with hands that are usually call-worthy. Hero and Button call.

9.5 SBs.

Flop: J [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] J [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 3 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

Maniac bets, you raise, Button cold calls. Maniac now three bets and both Hero and button call.

9 BB's.

Turn: 4 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Maniac bets. What's your plan?

[/ QUOTE ]

I know the book says to fold here since Ive read it a few times. I think folding is the right play unless you are positive this maniac will 3bet the flop with A-high even though he has 2 people committed on the flop. Once two people are committed on the flop even super-lags wont 3bet here unless they have 99 beat. And when you factor in that the guy behind you can easily have Jx, I think the turn is a fold.

[Michael Davis]

No way I'm folding this spot. If I'm supposed to fold here then calling the maniac a maniac is just a little language game designed to make me answer incorrectly. I calldown unless the button raises at any point.

-Michael

[SackUp]

I'm calling until the button shows strength. His flop cc is fishy, but could easily have a mid pp, or overs (thinking I'm raising him out of the hand if we both know the other guy is a maniac).

[colgin]

[ QUOTE ]
No way I'm folding this spot. If I'm supposed to fold here then calling the maniac a maniac is just a little language game designed to make me answer incorrectly. I calldown unless the button raises at any point.

-Michael

[/ QUOTE ]

The book says to fold, but my feelings were exactly what you described. If I should be folding here, then the label "maniac", no matter how qualified, should not be applied to BB. I plan to call down unless Button wakes up.

[___]

I find this book often exagerrates, and most of my "incorrect" answers are based on different interpretations of the language. Many hyper-aggressives will play this way with small pairs hoping to be good againt high cards and wanting to at least play headsup.

[belloc]

[ QUOTE ]
I find this book often exagerrates, and most of my "incorrect" answers are based on different interpretations of the language.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly how I feel about this book. I had just read this 99 hand again the other day and had been trying to figure out why the fold was so obvious to Jacobs (and not to me).

I guess finally I think it's neither the continued aggression of the 'maniac', nor the weird coldcalling of the passive player behind, but the combination of the two. He must be thinking that there's enough likelihood that you're beat by one or both of them that it's not worth the possibility that it's going to cost you three bets to show down your pair.

When I took the quiz, I got docked for this decision like we all did, but I often get docked for not understanding exactly what he's trying to get me to think about a particular situation.