JJ vs aggrofish

Hmm not easy, sort of marginal but....I think JJ is too strong to fold here against said player. Against an unknown I'd lean towards folding. Not snap calling though. Maybe I'd try and get him to talk a bit or see if he was showing any signs of being nervous to see if I could find a reason to fold. I might try and get a reaction to asking something like "do you have 66's again?!" Him cold 4! with 66 tells me he's capable of raising here with hands worse than JJ, but then again he knows you know that and you've been playing tight and the hand just happened the one prior which confuses things a bit.... but maybe that means he thinks you'll fold? ....yeah leaning towards call might find a fold based on tells. I don't think it's a huge mistake just to fold either.

I may have also just called pre here on button instead of 3betting to avoid having to make this decision and risk getting it on massively behind vs QQ-AA, but if I'm choosing to 3! i'm probably not looking to fold it, so I think it is what it is and just hope you're ahead at this point I guess.

Snap as described. Expect to be flipping. Honestly sounds like tilt, here. I'd call down to 77/88 and be cool with running it twice.

Edit, your 3! is fine. You're very likely in the lead. Why wouldn't we want to iso against the tilting donk?

Cast a jaundiced eye towards everything, if they magically---one hand after showing 66---manage to secure one of the 18 combos that beats you pf.

What a coincidence, right?

Think we have to call this guy, he could have all sorts of nonsense here as well as perceived value like 99 or AQ. Also his sizing leans against AA.

I’m skeptical about calling here because of the read. Why are people basing the read on the last action rather than all the previous ones? Furthermore, V 4bet bluffed/folded to a 400 shove with 100 in the pot but now shoves 500 to win 60? I would call if V were on tilt, but OP doesn’t mention tilt as a factor. You’re likely just flipping, maybe slightly +ev but not a lot, and you should be well bankrolled to ride out high variance moves.

Tbh I'm surprised everyone here goes for a call.

Perhaps I should've called. I'm still not too sure.
This guy probably wasn't on tilt even though he rebought a few times because he spews so much postflop I can't identify it as tilt.
Anyhow I stacked him later on in the night with AA.
He goes 20, we go 60 again, same positions. bb shortstacker ships for 100, he calls, we 4bet small to 260 (he didn't know i could raise he wanted to fold to the 4bet shove if he knew) he called
kqx donk shove with kt. i snapped.

Given he didn't want to get in stacks with 66 but seems more comfortable getting in stacks against a tight image, I'd fold.

FWIW, if I wasn't fairly comfortable/confident making this fold I might just flat preflop.

GcluelessNLnoobG

Anything other than a 3bet would be absurd. Now call, although it's rather close.

Huge aggrofish borderline maniac saying they had AA might not necessarily mean they had AA, although of course aggrofish borderline maniacs do get dealt AA as often as the rest of us, sadlyu

You have jacks against a borderline maniac, this is a fist pump gii.

+1.

Guy 4bets to $100 with 66, calls off $260 preflop with KT and pretends that he has AA when he makes spazzy preflop shoves.

Urge to call intensifies.

I'd probably fold to the snap 4B-ship, even if V has a maniacal image.

This seems like a commonly recurring situation. A player at the table repeatedly takes aggressive actions, and shows down trashy hands, cultivating a "maniac" image, until finally someone calls off a huge over-bet shove with a seemingly strong hand, only to lose, and says, "my bad luck - he actually had it this time."

What's missed is how often the maniac was taking aggressive action in small pots, when his opponents showed weakness, and he showed trash hands when everyone folded, but he never puts his whole stack at risk with a trash hand when his opponents are showing nothing but strength.

In this specific V's case, it may be worth noting that most of his aggro moves are post-flop, not pre-flop. It may be that he has some ability to hand-read and pick up whenever an opponent shows weakness, or simply that he understands his image makes it possible for him to rep a strong hand on a lot of boards.

I'd pay attention to the sorts of hands he's showing down post-flop, noting how often he pushed or called with a decent draw, or on boards that might seem to favor his range, and how often he traps with nutted hands.

This style of play is almost like a modified version of small ball. He's playing lots of pots, without committing a lot of money pre-flop, delaying his aggression to future streets, when he can credibly rep some strong hands, or show up with some surprisingly strong hands, because his range is so wide.

Maniacs are motivated to cause pain. If he had a bluff, he'd have shown it. I'm somewhat surprised he didn't try to lie to you and say he was bluffing. If he said he had some trash hand, I'd be pretty sure he was lying, and had JJ crushed.

Jamming with AA makes sense if he's been cultivating a wild man image prior to that. He may have told you he had AA in the hopes more of his bluffs get through in the future. If he was thinking ahead, he'd have shown the AA.

If I'm playing in a wild game, and my image is above-average aggro, I'll 4B over-bet jam with AA, praying someone thinks I'm pushing with AK, and calls with a worse PP. If I don't get action, I'll show the AA, because I know my 4B range is more than just AA/KK.