€100+10 NL HE MTT: Can you make a Hero call with Ace High against a maniac?

primrose · Jun 11, 2025

This hand is from the same tournament as the other hand, against the same obscenely aggressive player in the HJ. Here, I'm in the Small Blind with

and the Blinds are now 75/150. I have a stack of around 8000 and HJ is the chipleader.

UTG+2 limps. HJ raises to 450. The problem about being a maniac is that it weakens your range, so whereas I'd just fold this hand against most people, I instead 3bet it to 1400. UTG+2 gets out the way and maniac calls.

Flop comes

(Pot=3400).

I considered leading here but I decided that check-raising is stronger, so I check. However, Villain checks back.

Turn comes

(Pot=3400). I've picked up an OESD, in addition to a decent chance of having the better hand already. I decide to lead with the intention of jamming all-in (3betting) if I get raised.I bet 800. To my surprise, Villain just calls the 800.

River comes

(Pot=5000). This is a pretty gross spot. I can't credibly represent much here except an overpair.I don't know what the right play is here, but I check. Villain bets a chunky 3200.

Against most people this is such an obvious fold that doing anything else is practically lighting chips on fire. But against this guy I'm not so sure. However the problem is that even if he is bluffing, it's not inconceivable for him to be ahead anyway. It would be extremely painful to bluff catch and then get beaten by AJ. And the other problem is that him being this aggressive widens his squeezing range, which makes it more likely that he actually this board. But on the third hand, I only have to put in 3200 to win 11400.

Decision:

call

Reveal if I called:

Villain had

, so we chopped. I was a little annoyed about this result; I felt like after correctly making a hero call for half my starting stack, I deserved to win the hand, but alas.

This hand notably also explains why Villain called the Turn rather than raising.

fundiver199 · Jun 12, 2025

Preflop
You are supposed to continue with this hand even against a normal player, and you can either call or 3-bet. I kind of lean towards a call, because I would guess, that a maniac dont like to fold to 3-bets? And without folds you are kind of just building a big pot, when you are out of position with a somewhat marginal hand. I would rather 3-bet in position or 3-bet someone else, who have a fold button. Just calling allow the limper into the pot, but I dont think, thats a disaster. He will have hands, that you dominate, like A5s, JTs etc., and if he did limp AJ+, he is probably going to call your 3-bet or even come in for a 4-bet.

Flop
I would normally make a standard small C-bet here with two overs and backdoors. However the issue is, that if the maniac fights back, you are in a sort of tough spot, where its difficult to continue, and for that reason I think, its fine to check.

Turn
Against a normal player I would make a delayed C-bet on this card, but I would go larger, since the goal is to make him fold. However against a maniac, there is still the issue, that most of them dont have a fold bottom, and this hand is not really strong enough, that we are trying to induce a raise. So I think, I lean towards another check with intention to call any reasonable bet or even check-jam, which might actually get some fold equity.

River
I definitely think, the play here is to check. As it played out, you could have the best hand, but its clearly not strong enough to bet for value. He is not calling with A5-A6 or worse. You check, and now he make a significant bet. 3d is pretty much a total brick, that only improved 33. And if he had anything strong, would he not have 4-bet preflop, bet the flop or raised the turn facing such a small bet? So yeah I think, I might find a huge hero call here, even though its true, he could potentially be bluffing with AJ or AQ.

Result
At least chopping is better than losing.

primrose · Jun 12, 2025

fundiver199 said:
Preflop
You are supposed to continue with this hand even against a normal player, and you can either call or 3-bet. I kind of lean towards a call, because I would guess, that a maniac dont like to fold to 3-bets? And without folds you are kind of just building a big pot, when you are out of position with a somewhat marginal hand. I would rather 3-bet in position or 3-bet someone else, who have a fold button. Just calling allow the limper into the pot, but I dont think, thats a disaster. He will have hands, that you dominate, like A5s, JTs etc., and if he did limp AJ+, he is probably going to call your 3-bet or even come in for a 4-bet.

Isn't this reasoning inconsistent? As in, if you consider this hand marginal, why would you play it against a normal player, in the worst position, when you're only getting half a BB discount? (Almost everyone does this, but I don't understand why. I call less than ~99% of players from the Small Blind.)

I've 3bet this hand because I'm expecting to have the better hand -- for value, not as a bluff.

makisaa · Jun 17, 2025

The wins you can have here are with straights or pairs or lower. Both of you were lucky and you had an A10 suited. If I was chasing a straight with that betting, if I was at many stages later in the game and knowing what the opponent is, there would be a small chance to play this hand. The majority of the times in that buy in tournament, I wouldn't continue it after the flop.