It is not uncommon to find players who have difficulty facing maniacal/loose-aggressive opponents. This type of opponent is one who bets on many hands, alternating weak hands with good hands, always with great aggression. To discuss this subject, we will start with a statistical definition.
Probabilistic Equivalence
By definition, Probabilistic Equivalence (equiprobable) is when two different events have an (approximately) equal chance of occurring.
Examples (hands go all in pf; percentages represent the equity of each hand, calculated with PokerStove)
:9c :9s (81.245%):Kc :Ks (81.245%)
:9s :7d (58.835%):Ks :Jd (58.539%)
Therefore both the situations in the examples are in poker equiprobable. Now let's see this concept applied to a hand.
You are in a low buy-in MTT tournament (something like $10), and your bankroll is still small for such a tournament, but you won your seat with a $0.25 satellite. Therefore, this tournament is a “Main Event” for you. You have studied the techniques, know the hand selection, pot odds, M factor. With blinds at 50/100, you have 4,500 chips, and the average is 5,000 chips. The ITM is still far away, but if you play and win two or three medium pots you can easily get there.
Everything was going well until Joe came to the table. He arrived with 10,000 chips and was placed on your left. He is a crazy maniac, playing really wrong (he 4Bets all in with 83 against a super conservative player who had raised 4.5BB; he got called and lost to AA…).
A maniac on the left is always a problem, but the biggest problem was that he 80% every time he was UTG he would go all in pf (maybe he realized you were tight)… And his stack started to dwindle.
Ups and downs later, and a lot of giving, making the other players at the table party, Zé has 2,500 chips with blinds 75/150 in the UTG. And as usual, he goes all in. You look at your cards and see :Ad :6h . You look at your stack and see 3,800 chips (M = 16.9). You can't stand to see your chips decrease, the guy steal your blinds and show 73off and still everyone at the table partying against him, with hands much weaker than A6off... You decide to call, knowing that your equity against his range is more than 55%. Unfortunately, the villain had :7c :7s and no A appeared (a :6d still appeared on the river), doubling Zé and leaving you with 1,300 chips… Being the dealer, you go all in with AQoff and the chip leader at the table (to Zé's left, of course) calls with JJ and you are eliminated.
This little story is made up, but it could have happened to anyone.
“How to turn a donkey into Phil Hellmuth!”
Just one interesting detail: that call with A6off turned the weak 77 into a powerful pair of KK!! This is what I call turning a donkey into Phil Helmuth!
Look at the numbers:
:Ad :6h (29.236%):Ad :Qh (28.396%)
In other words, Zé's all-in turned his A6off into a powerful hand like AQo!! It's incredible how stupid Zé is!! There's just one detail: your call turned his 77 into KK!! You turned an almost idiotic play into a perfect move!!!
So, here's some advice: be patient! Avoid turning weak opponents into poker geniuses with unnecessary calls!
Reflect on this topic, leave comments and discuss in the forum!
English 
Português do Brasil 
Español 
The article is a ten out of ten, a technical explanation for the tip that the hand that goes all-in is not the same as the one that calls an all-in!
Very good Petrillo, I always see chip leaders calling dead opponents with 82 of and putting them back into the game.
Dude, I already fell for this, but I was playing AKoff Vs AQpaus
I got the flush on the last card,
the same thing happened to me. The same hand
Dear Petrilo,
Should I wait for a pair of aces to call me? I'm tired of raising to these lucky guys when I have a pair of JJ, AK, QQ against 87off, AToff, etc... Honestly, I believe that not even a pair of aces can save someone in these situations because these guys literally take it on "luck". What intrigues me is how often this happens in online games. Just today, I was playing against a maniac who had gone all-in about 10 times in a row and the "lucky" guy only managed to lose twice, increasing his stack from 1500 to 11000 chips and exterminating most of his opponents. It was a sit & go and I was just starting out. I saw that he was playing with nothing in his hand and decided to wait. I received AKoff in the UTG and opened with a 3xBB raise (him) already expecting the all-in re-raise, which, in fact, happened. The guy had 89off and hit a straight, pissing me off. I don't know, but sometimes I'm suspicious of these online games. Could someone explain to me how the shuffling and dealing system works?
Thanks,
A hug!
Gabriel Reis
Gabriel,
Regarding calling, of course you shouldn't wait for just a pair of Aces to call. You have to adapt to each situation, and know that no hand is invincible pre-flop. To become a great poker player you have to know how to deal with this type of frustration.
Regarding online poker, good poker sites use very advanced randomization algorithms. The explanation is complex, here is a topic for reference:
https://pokerdicas.com/forum/discussao-geral-sobre-poker/3263-discussao-sobre-randomizacao.html
What happened to you is statistical variance, and to play poker you have to be prepared to deal with it. It happens both online and live, but online you play a lot more hands so it seems like it's worse.
In the example you mentioned, you called all-in with a hand that isn't that good for it. AK is good for raising, has fold equity and is a good draw if called. In your case, the villain had a 36% chance of winning, so it wasn't that bad of a beat.
Goodnight!
I know it's a bit complicated to get into a discussion on this topic, but I largely agree with Gabriel Reis (above). It often gives the impression that online games give "preference" to players who frequently go all-in and/or are the chip leader. But as I mentioned at the beginning, it's complicated to get into a discussion.
Junior.
And I thought I was the only one who had noticed that chip leaders have a certain advantage in the results. Of course, having more chips does not guarantee victory, but I have done statistical calculations and I have this feeling of privilege for chip leaders in tournaments, but it is necessary to optimize the movement of players on the sites, maximizing profits. Solution? Take this element into consideration and try to be the chip leader at your tournament table. I have not noticed this privilege at cash game tables.
There is no privilege for chip leaders. It's simple: short players need to go all-in with marginal hands, they can't wait for better hands. And chip leaders can call more easily. It's funny that I see people saying the opposite, that short players are the ones who are favored lol. Solution: gather your statistics and take legal action against the poker rooms. If you're right, you'll become a millionaire! But why has no one been able to prove this to this day, even though they have access to all the hands played (hand histories)?
Goodnight!
Entering into this conspiracy frenzy is no longer appropriate for the level of Brazilian poker.
Bad beat exists and will continue to punch many grown men in the face, so it is an unnecessary and never-ending fight.
As Marcelo said, some hands are good for going All In, but they are not so good for calling an All In (especially preflop). And going after these maniacs in their donkey moves will hurt you, taking away a good part of your stack in this way, decreasing your chances of playing better hands.
I took a lot of bad beats: AKs with K on the flop and two more suited hands (7 and 2) if I'm not mistaken. I called the maniac's All In, after 3-betting his post-flop raise, he showed T3o without any connection with the suits on the board. Turn T and River T. The guy trips my pair of Ks, my FD doesn't hit, and I'm out of the tournament. Now ask me if I would do this again? My answer would be that I would do the same thing a million times. Patience, that's the secret!!! I've lost (my patience) many times, I confess, and I don't even know if I have enough, but I'm trying to get more of it every day...
A guy once said, “A good fold is a crazy fold,” when we were discussing a fold of AA on a flop and turn with “under cards” and a bad preflop slowplay. Now think about it…
The example given in the article happened recently. I was well-placed, then a guy sat down on my left side. In the first hand he went all in and won with a pair of kings. Then in the second hand he bet big preflop, someone called, and after the flop he went all in and the other guy folded. Then in the third hand I had JT and raised preflop to see if he would fold, but he called. No one entered the hand. So I asked for a check to see his reaction because he had beaten my T, so the crazy guy went all in again. I was thinking and thought he just wanted to laugh at me folding because he had an A on the board, but then I ended up folding. He showed his hand and had 57 with nothing... I wanted to know if I played correctly or if I should have trusted my reading of the game more. Thanks.
Raoni, the ideal against maniacs is to wait to have a good hand.
JT is not a hand to raise preflop in these cases.
And having only second pair on the flop isn't worth the risk either.
Let's suppose that Manic raised 3 BB and everyone folds. I look at my cards and see AA. Would it be better to just call and let him hang himself? Or bet heavily. Or bet heavily but not too much to attract the villain? By the way, this site is very good. It's very easy to understand the concept, unlike some books.
In this case, tzar, it might even be worth it to just call and watch him get stuck. Some maniacs will bet every street trying to kick you out. The problem is that you won't have much of a read on what he has. If you re-raise pre-flop (3-bet), he'll hardly call with a very bad hand. But he might decide to bluff with another re-raise, which is great for you. So 3-betting has these advantages too.
A good chip collector (winner) has to keep in mind that losing on a bad beat is like paying taxes. In order to make long-term gains, you will necessarily lose (with or without bad beats). This is what I call “paying taxes”. What’s more, it will happen in your favor too, not as often as you see donkeys taking down the pots, but when you are losing the game absurdly and that one saving card appears on the river. It’s part of the game. In fact, note that the winners of many “bad beat” hands are certainly the biggest losers in poker in the medium to long term.
That's right Felipe. Bad beats are part of the game, you have to know how to let them go. I've seen players like Phil Ivey lose pots with full vs. straight flush and not get upset. The long term favors quality players.
“It’s easier to win a pot by going all in than by calling an all in.”
very good this and all your articles...
congratulations
Be patient against the donkeys, it's a delight to know how to wait and make them bite the bullet! A maniacal donkey in a 100 free tournament with rebuy, post-break and rebuy period:
Donkey on the button: raise 03bb
Small:Fold
I big blind: AA just call… (pinches me)
Flop: 5 5 2 rainbow
Me: check
Donkey: bet half the pot
Me: mini-raise
Donkey: call
Turn: A (pinch meeeeeeeee)
Me: check
Donkey: all in
Me: call (pinch!!!)
Donkey: makes that face with the hook in his throat and shows Q 2
River: 9
Detail: it came out tilted….. Uhauahuahauha
Hehehe, you said it all: “It’s a delight to know how to wait and make them bite the bullet!”
I liked the analogy! lol
I'm not having any luck in my hands... I always get low cards, 3 and 7, 4 and 9, 2 and 3, 3 and 8, 2 and 7 etc... this has been going on for months... is there a strategy to use to try to play with weak hands or is it better to be patient and wait for the bad phase to pass? Cheers.
Sensational. Unfortunately, it has already happened to me, but I will take this article into consideration from now on.