We have a maniac behind us.

You fold AJ six handed?

open, stack off pre w maniac

This is the bottom of my raising range UTG 6 handed, that said I'm a huge nit so you may be too tight. I would raise a normal size here I think, not sure if that's a mistake or not.

If the maniac is as bad as you indicate and also completely oblivious I'd probably raise a smidge more with nutty hands. The problem with raising more with strong hands is that it's pretty obvious to the non-terrible players at the table, which can be a problem and especially so in early position. So I'd only do it when I'm actively targeting a mark and preferably when we're likely to get heads-up, thus reducing the chance of a decent player exploiting me.

Alex Fitzgerald uses the term Fake Maniac to describe playing very loose aggressive pre-flop and on the flop, but only showing up on the turn and river with strong hands. It’s a great strategy.

This is why I tire of so many that simply can’t see that folding a hand pre-flop is never automatic. Floating early action of weak players has always been a thing. Polarized bets are supposed to contain junk.

First things first, that's a lucky situation

rock straddle
maniac call

AJo is the nuts here, its printing money

I dont mind a shove, actually, because eh, 66% of flops no ace no jack and maniac bet is not a good place to be, probably fold because he could have hit the board and bet for value while pretending to be maniac

raising 20$+ is certainly optimal

Id go 45$, make sure rock folds his bullshit and raise me with jacks+ and maniac thinks twice, ideally I want the maniac out before the flop

30$ raise is best but you will lose that 30$ surprisn'ingly often considering player tendencies, but overall +ev move that is certain

so yeah as ninefingersshuffles said, situation being as stated, AJ is mathematically the best hand here most of the time

Does the maniac raise a lot preflop? I'm a little unclear exactly where we are to the maniac, but if he does raise a lot preflop and if we're a seat or two to his right then even the most die hard I-always-raise-first-in folks have to admit this is a great spot to limp and evaluate the action (mostly LRRing against a maniac open and some dead money flats).

GcluelessNLnoobG

Agree with limp raise. Make it 100 and shove dark.

I feel like Mainiac is another term we don't agree on in this forum, just like OMC.

Mainiac (pre) for me is someone who is 50% plus VPIP in pre-flop, and virtually never calls, i.e. first in they raise, and then will always 3b and 4b.
Mainiac (post) does not fold much and generally always bets or raises, and very rarely checks or calls.

Maniac to me is calls lots preflop, and hammers the postflop with raises and calls way too often to be believable of holding a reasonable hand on all streets

The guy that raises a lot preflop I label him stupid aggressive.

I don't see the player profile you're talking about very often, usually hes passive and call-happy pre and then hammers the flop, that's the maniac I see most often.

The all streets maniac... is not a player profile I encounter a lot.. not even sure if its worth mentionning too, like, if he raises that much, just fold the next 10 hands and hes gonna be out or hes gonna have took everybody else out...

No don't see Mainiacs (my defintion) at all often at low stakes, but I think my point stands - we all have diferent definitions. If we're not aligned perhaps best to describe player tendencies and not use.

Maniac to me is guy who is blindly aggressive whether it be preflop or postflop.

Some people have contradicting preflop and postflop plays.

Preflop and postflop can split into two different categories if this was the case.

Ie. nitty preflop, station postflop
or station preflop, nitty postflop
etc.

Limp reraise it against him big

Yeah, but you said "calls with random trash" which doesn't seem very agressive; I'd expect a mainiac to raise with random trash.

Yeah, for me one of the main characteristics of a maniac is lottsa preflop raising. Obviously I have a LRR style at the best of times, but everyone should deviate to this LRR style with a maniac on our left.

GcluelessmaniacnoobG

Counter point would be that Mainiacs are 3betting a ton too, and so if you raise first in, you may have a chance to get more money in pre with big hands.

How do we solve this problem?
I read someone described as TAG that makes a play a TAG would never do in my mind.

It’s been hard for me to describe the opposition, because you get a different picture than I intend. My read on villain overrides every decision I make. It’s so important, yet when you describe villain, I can’t be sure it’s what I’m picturing.

Maniac to me makes extremely big bets in unpredictable ways. Such as when I open 15 on the button and he makes it 120. I’m not talking about betting big to take down the limpers, but he does that too. Bet a quarter on the flop and maniac raises 150.

Even though you know he’s often weak, he turns the pot odds upside down. He doesn’t necessarily play a lot of hands, but shows up in surprising spots with lots of leverage. He passes loose aggressive by forcing you to alter your play when he’s around.

And here again lies the problem. I think of Mainiacs as playing at least 50% of hands, and often more.

If we all have such different interpruations labels are meaningless, and either we i) Come to a common understanding/definition or ii) We just describe the player without a label.

Good point, maybe we explain why villain is given the label in context of the hand. I think it’s hard to come to a common understanding.

When Tommy Angelo came up with the highjack, it was easy to plug in & went mainstream. But there are just so many ways villains are categorized that coining that would be much more difficult.

What you describe is just loose aggressive to me and easy to exploit. They open wide, play back at them with a hand. Maybe let them hang themselves. I am certainly going to be better with my description if I post another hand.