AAQThh on J95h, 300bb Deep with Side Pot v. Maniac Fish

We ain’t folding.

Play turns and go from there. OE and BDNFD

You started the hand deep. But with there being a preflop 3bet and multiple preflop callers, you are now on the flop in a rather normal stack-to-pot ratio of about 4. Villain is the effective stack who started the hand with $1,500 and we subtract his preflop contribution of $75, therefore on flop villain has $1,425 divided by the pot of $300 to get a stack-to-pot ratio of 4.75 that for simplicity sake we will say is 4. An SPR of 1 or 4 is about as basic as it comes. The most popular hand we want preflop is AAxx. At some point you need to be rock solid on how you want to play AAxx heads up on any flop and any hand combo of AAxx on a SPR of 1 or 4. SPR of 1 or less is really easy, but the SPR of 4 is so common you need to do some decision making away from the table on how you want to play every scenario. There are obviously a lot of scenarios, but decide when you stack enough components together like straights draws and flush draws when it is go time. And then see if there are any reason base on reads to change anything up.

My quick take on this situation is that you were the preflop raiser and you are almost guaranteed to be raised by a maniac Villain on the flop if you call the 100 bet by SB. However, a minimum raise by you on the flop keeps the initiative, say it is a block bet if you want and maybe Jedi mind trick stops the Villain from raising.

Depends on reads. If you think he is a maniac postflop, then maybe shove. It seems like you are only really in trouble against a set.

Make it 600 over the short stack shove. Your hand is too good to fold but not good enough to trap.

As played, should we call or just get the money in?

I think calling the all-in bet is better than raising. It's a great hand to trap a maniac!

Now ship it in, I don't think flat accomplishes anything really and might let him escape on some runouts.

If you think he's jamming 2 pair or like pair+wrap hands here then you should get it in. "Maniac fish" isn't enough info for any of us to know this. Some guys are pretty crazy pf but are never pot stacking off here wo a set and others are 2pr+ here. If you think he only has sets you should be folding

Maniac fish who can only have sets here? Ok buddy

I've almost never found I'd describe as a 'maniac fish' who has a range of sets only here.

Well we have no description of him other than that but I play with guys that play every single hand basically and many of them are not putting in 300bb here with bottom 2. Some people also mistake pf range for things like flop stack off range but yea we basically just gotta stack off here if dude plays anything remotely like a maniac postflop

What is a maniac?

If the guy is TRULY a maniac this doesn't even need to be a post so....

However I see plenty of people overestimate that someone is a maniac bc they play 80% of hands pf. This is a hand where a guy is putting in 300bb on the flop essentially, is he still a maniac? I have no idea since we have no description of his play style other than "maniac fish"

Imo playing 80% of hands has nothing to do with being a maniac. A maniac bets and raises a lot with bluffs and very weak holdings. Very aggressive in general.

There is no world in which you should try to get away from a maniac on that board. Try to find a line where he might put a lot of money in bad. For me call is without doubt the best first action and the point is definitely not to fold when a maniac raises.

Do you really see that? I don't think I've ever seen that before. That's easily described as a 'really loose fish'. Maniac means aggro. Maniac has never meant 'loose'. And we haven't had any comment from OP on their VPIP.

What is the maximum buy-in for this game?

Max buy-in might be a reasonable consideration on how to play the hand (the flop). I've seen some huge games with no max buy-in or a "match the biggest stack" buy-in allowed. But most $1-2 games are likely to have a max buy-in of around $200-1,000. Since this game is a $5 bring in, I could see the max buy-in being $500 or $1,000.

My vote on this flop is to try and keep the flop pot as small as possible. The SB went all in for 100 and I believe if you call the 100 then the maniac villain is almost guaranteed to raise. Therefore my attempt to keep flop pot as small as possible is to try to induce the maniac to not do this raise by me instead minimum raising the SB 100 with me going to 200. I'm trying. If maniac villain when facing a raise and a re-raise in front of him still wants to raise, then there wasn't a damn thing I could have done, but at least I tried. And of course I gladly get it all in here. But and it is an important but, my main goal was to initially try to keep this flop pot as small as possible. Why?

maximum buy-in.

If the max buy-in is $500 and you lose this hand, then the maniac villain is going to be sitting on a $3,000 stack and your stack will be $500. In my opinion, if your first plan of action here is to flip on the flop, then that is "needlessly" flipping all-in with "only" an over pair and an 8 out straight draw. I'm gladly flipping all-in if my flop pot control doesn't work, but I am sure not needlessly flipping as my first plan of action.

Yea, I see them do it all the time when I'm playing. They see some really loose player pf and he sticks in like 300bb and unsurprisingly has a set and their AA is no good 😮

Then they're horrifically misunderstanding what 'maniac' means

Villain's VPIP is 80%, raises 50% of his hands pre. Maximum buy-in is 500. Villain usually brings 2k and buys in for various amounts between 100-500, trying to get it in quickly.

But once he runs it up, he tightens up just a little bit. I imagine the minimum strength hands he'd jam here are bottom two pair or pair plus a non-nut wrap.