100NL 2 hands against a maniac

[MG0698]

villian had maniac stats from which i had on him before this session. He was 50/21/2over 38 hands. 80% flop CB (4 out of 5)

Hand 1 i was planning on c/r flop and get it in . On the turn i was gonna bet, but decided it would be better to let him fire the turn but he checked back again, river is just like WTF

This hand happened before hand 2

Hand 1

UTG: $420.40
MP: $156.10
CO: $154.85
BTN: $128.85
SB: $45.40
Hero (BB): $100.00

Pre Flop: ($1.50) Hero is BB with A:spade: Q:spade:
UTG raises to $5, 4 folds, Hero calls $4

Flop: ($10.50) 2:diamond: K:spade: J:spade: (2 players)
Hero checks, UTG checks

Turn: ($10.50) Q:club: (2 players)
Hero checks, UTG checks

River: ($10.50) 4:club: (2 players)
Hero bets $7, UTG raises to $80, Hero??


Same villian here, The PFR was TAG

Hand 2 after first hand

UTG: $438.75
MP: $196.10
CO: $101.85
BTN: $100.00
SB: $116.30
Hero (BB): $104.50

Pre Flop: ($1.50) Hero is BB with 3:diamond: 3:club:
UTG calls $1, MP raises to $5, 3 folds, Hero calls $4, UTG calls $4

Flop: ($15.50) 3:spade: 4:spade: 2:heart: (3 players)
Hero bets $9, UTG calls $9, MP folds

Turn: ($33.50) 6:spade: (2 players)
Hero checks, UTG checks

River: ($33.50) 7:club: (2 players)
Hero checks, UTG bets $46, Hero ??


By the way why can't i see suites??

[TheDeKay]

Hand 1 - Just fold
Hand 2 - call... he seems to attack weakness with overbets and his stacksizes looks like a hyperaggro-fish on a hot streak. There are not THAT many 5 in his range... btw I prefer a bigger lead on the flop... like 13.50$, cause I want to build the pot vs overpairs, that are unlikely to fold anyways.

[MG0698]

Originally Posted by TheDeKay

Hand 1 - Just fold
Hand 2 - call... he seems to attack weakness with overbets and his stacksizes looks like a hyperaggro-fish on a hot streak. There are not THAT many 5 in his range... btw I prefer a bigger lead on the flop... like 13.50$, cause I want to build the pot vs overpairs, that are unlikely to fold anyways.

yea hand 2 betsize sucked

[Spinage]

I was gonna reply to this yesterday but when i was doing the math i got logged out..

Basically, hand 2 is a shove/fold. I had some really good reasoning for this, but I can't remebered (be bothered working it out again) but basically.. if i remember right, he has to be bluffing 73% of the time for a neutral EV call, and then its negative because of rake anyway.

So a call is really bad, If you are so certain he is bluffing that u would call why not shove and make some moneys! (I worked that out, it came to you needing him to fold something like ~50% of the time to make it profitable, exluding the times he calls and splits (which is obviously -EV, but not too bad).

I would most likely fold. But if you have good history and he bluffs here 50% of the time a shove is a lot better than a call.

[TheDeKay]

Originally Posted by Spinage

I would most likely fold. But if you have good history and he bluffs here 50% of the time a shove is a lot better than a call.

Could you post your math for this? Cause I don't think, he is bet-folding any hand that beats us... so I don't see why bluff>call.

Btw... There is 46+33.5=79.5 in the pot and 46 to call. So we get 1.73 to 1 pot odds => So we have to be good like 36% of the time to break even for a call.

To break even on a 1:1 you have to be good 50% of the time (e.g. you bet even money on a coinflip). If you have to pay like 100$ to win a 50$ pot you have to be good ~67% of the time... So how did you get 73%??

Edit: Isn't rake already deducted from the pot on the flop??

[Michaellawrw]

hand 1 is a fold.
hand 2 is a check if he is betting he is cbetting and often we will get him cbetting his ace for the str8 draw and overs and his fd+2 overs. Then a raise on that board. Yes a check raise looks strong, but most hands he continues with reraises you such as flush draws.