5$ | FR | T | bubble | QTs

If he's doing this often you can also shove on him, but off course if he called often if you do that it's a really nasty ICM situation.

Cheers,
SDK1987

Mandatory call, period... If this is too bad flop to continue I would ask if we want to play this in first place?

Raising doesn't make sense tbh.

well its a mway pot and one donks mway too. Which hands do we beat after this action if we want to play a small pot due to the bubble? If we have just one caller or no db its much better to continue. I can find those spots where raising and playing is easier and more profitable.

greets

maniac

Well he is betting 1/3 pot and you define him as maniac so I would expect that he can have huge amount of hands we are ahead. Top pairs, middle pairs, OESD, gutshots, flush draws and sometimes some total airballs... If we can give him enough credit to fold flop I would think of him more as nit than maniac.

I dont think so because a maniac defined by playing overly agressive. This does not mean he put out the aggression with big bet sizings. This guy bet a rididiculous frequency. This doesnt fit for a nit. Nertheless you are correct his range should be wide enough I get that. My problem is I have to invest in a difficult spot money to prove it. It is cev wise profitable due to our ranges but why should we take such spot? Imo this one lowers variance dramatically. Dont you think that playing marginal hands on the bubble should be avoided or do you seize any opportunity? For ne tbh it depends on the table. If there are 2 or more fish I rather bet on my edge later on. When I am in doubt I prefer to do this anyway. Maybe this is stylistic.

greets

maniac

Hi id most likely shove on such opponents in this spot .
Yesterday i had a simular spot in the early phase of a bounty tournament but a bit harder one ,with the same type of a player .
so I shoved its in the tournament section have a look at it.

Originally posted by maniac
I dont think so because a maniac defined by playing overly agressive. This does not mean he put out the aggression with big bet sizings. This guy bet a rididiculous frequency. This doesnt fit for a nit. Nertheless you are correct his range should be wide enough I get that. My problem is I have to invest in a difficult spot money to prove it. It is cev wise profitable due to our ranges but why should we take such spot? Imo this one lowers variance dramatically. Dont you think that playing marginal hands on the bubble should be avoided or do you seize any opportunity? For ne tbh it depends on the table. If there are 2 or more fish I rather bet on my edge later on. When I am in doubt I prefer to do this anyway. Maybe this is stylistic.

greets

maniac

Well for me top pair with good kicker is better than marginal hand versus wide range. If you fold this one how tight are you going to go? KT, AT? QsTx?

This is a blocking bet, so He did nt hit the board, or just partially, A8, J9, KJ, and some other combo, but if it's not a polar player this raise it might be a flush draw mostly from BB , KT should defend better this spot, imho

So if it's a flush draw and deepstack just call and check it's turn reaction, and in case shove there !

well at least AT and KT and any Q with bdfd. Do you think this is too tight?

greets

maniac

Really he can have everything,

Because with KT or AT it's more easy to just check and check call 7check-raise you don't make a blockbet! , so he can stay behind JJ QQ etc...