What do you do if someone is allway "all in"?

It’s only a -EV spot if it’s guaranteed the someone is going to have JJ+, AQ+, but that’s rarely going to be the case, especially when you block many of those combos. Also, if it was correct to play tight, then can they even call against 2 people with most of those hands?

I agree there are spots to play tight, I just don’t think this is one of them. I rarely play tournaments though, or 9 handed, so my opinion isn’t worth that much. It does seem from the stats people were posting in other threads that it’s possible to cash at a very high rate on Replay, so I don’t think staying alive is worth nothing, but I still think it has to be worth less than a reasonably good chance of doubling up.

Anyway, in terms of what I would be all in with, basically every double broadway hand, most suited Ax, pocket pairs ~8’s+.

They definitely can! it would be a really good +EV spot if they think you’ll be calling with AJ+, 99+ let alone with the range you provided.

In my example, I do think you should be folding and playing much more tight unless you know for a fact that the players behind are extremely NITS.

Nah man, every input is a good input. Just your claim that we shouldn’t play tight against these people rub me the wrong way since there are nuances and the application is what matters, not just a generalize statement.

By the way I do understand your perspective of calling with AJ that even though it will be a -EV if we get a call from behind, the potential to double up or triple up far outweighs the slight -EV we might get ourselves into.
Personally I just don’t like putting myself at risk in a marginal situation when I know I can have a greater edge in other spots. That don’t mean I don’t put myself at risk early on (you should look at my recent hand lol) but I try to have a bigger edge rather than a marginal edge.

They really can’t. Apart from the big blind, they also have players behind. Of course it’s +EV for the big blind to call with JJ+, AQ+ vs a wider range, but they still lose more than half the time against any 2 cards and the range I gave. In general, I don’t think players should avoid +EV spots however marginal, based on an assumption that their opponent is going to take every marginal +EV spot.

I’m still skeptical, but willing to concede that you and many of the other strong tournament players might have a big enough edge that you can avoid these spots, but then I don’t think many of you are complaining about the maniacs either. I stand by my advice not to play tight against maniacs in general though.

That was the whole point of my example. That you can’t call wide since you have 5 players behind…

I’m not disputing that, I said that the player behind is correct to call with JJ+, AQ+ vs an ATC maniac and a AJ+ 99+ range caller. the BB is one of the players behind yet to act…

Right, but we only have one player behind that can call with that range now. It turns out it doesn’t matter though. Calling with the range I suggested always wins more money than calling with a tighter range of JJ+, AQ+


That’s ignoring the fact you block a lot of the combos that can call, and assuming the odds of getting called with n players yet to act is n times the odds of a single player. In reality the second call won’t happen near as often, making calling the maniac wide even more profitable.

1 Like

Just to clarify the JJ+,AQ+ range was for the second caller that they can in fact call if they think that you are calling with a reasonable range, not the hero caller.

Also I made a mistake in my math, I was doing range vs hand vs range rather than range vs range vs range. which made me believe that it was a really marginal -EV spot. it still is a marginal “breakeven spot” as proof of your graph with many callers behind. But we are in a better shape than what I expected to be.

BTW what software did you use for that graph?

I know, I just wanted a to compare against a tighter hero calling range too, and that seemed as good as any. The graph is just Google Sheets.

I don’t quite how it’s a marginal spot though. We’re winning at least 1.2 bb every hand on average, assuming the worst.

I calculated the odds of actually winning the hand given that the hero calls too, it’s pretty much always >50% unless you are hero calling extremely wide.

One thing to keep in mind - things are a lot closer if the maniac is only shoving 50% of hands. Playing wide still makes more money than playing tight unless you’re in early position though, but it’s a lot closer.

Yeah on average our whole range will win 1.2 bb when calling a maniac. There are other spots that we can find where we can have a better EV output. Players yet to act influence our decisions. Whether they will call or not that is irrelevant, you calling a maniac with a reasonable range with 5 players yet to act lowers our EV regardless if we are crushing villains range.

Like I said, if you are a strong player you can find plenty of low variance +EV spots rather than a marginal spot for 1.2 bb whilst we are risking our tournament life.

Sorry, I think I have misled you. We don’t win 1.2bb when calling, we win 1.2bb averaged over every hand, including the ones we fold. (Also 1.2bb is worst case, 3bb is more realistic)

To put things in perspective, I think everyone would fist bump call with AA, but aces have an average EV of only 0.31bb. You’ll win 85% of the time when you do get them, but while that player waits 221 hands for aces, playing a wide range would have already profited ~600bb. Even if we take the worst case it’s 265bb vs 70bb for the aces. That’s a lot of lost EV to make up.

I’m sure the strong players do indeed have even bigger edges in other spots, but what about the players who are struggling to break even?

Admittedly I worded my first response poorly. It’s a perfectly valid strategy if you believe you have a big enough edge in other spots. I do think playing tight is extremely counter productive for most of the people that have asked for advice battling the maniacs and bingo players though.

Hoernchen1
My advice is to sit tight and wait for quality cards, like pocket Aces or Kings, and you still might lose. These players will almost always lose their full stack near the beginning of the tournament. It would be nice if you could be the one to take the freely offered chips but stay the course. Stay away from bad positions at the table when the person has not acted yet. They will usually bust out and you can play your normal game.
Stay safe and good luck, David

Many are playing up to 6 or more tournaments at once! Its not against rules. Even encouraged. You cant really play 6 tables here, its too fast. But you can go all-in on 6 tables and if 2 to 4 hit its a win. So they play 6 , win 1 they did ok. Even though it ruins games.

Hoernchen1

Remember that this is a free tournament and the player you are talking about is having his kind of fun and doesn’t care about losing all of his chips.
You have to decide for yourself why you are playing in this particular tournament. For me, I always have four goals.
#1 - make it into the money payouts.
#2 - make it to the final table.
#3 - Make it to the final 3 players.
#4 - win the tournament.

Most advice you get about odds and statistics go out the window when you are playing with a player like this in a free money tournament. Wait for the right cards in the right position. (and you still might lose everything)
Sit tight, stay focused, have fun, and rip him a new one if the opportunity comes up.

stay safe, David

Hi Fellas, :smiley:

I may be wrong, but I do not believe it is an individual player Hoernchen1 is referring to but multiple players at the same time/table.

Put it down to translation error but I believe he was referring to, expressing frustration with, and asking advice regarding playing in a tournament or table in which there is somebody shoving all in almost every hand. First this player and then that player and then the other player etc.

You folks seem to be having a grand old wonderful time with your (way above my head :crazy_face:) highly technical discussion about dealing with one of these players but how about playing against a bunch of them? Do you have anything for that? I would like to hear what you all have to say about that. My advice is find a better game, what do you think? Is there a viable strategy for this situation?
Cheers! :grinning:

If you’re talking about just one player per hand shoving, all it being a different player means is that they’re shoving less than 100% of hands. That will decrease how much you win, but doesn’t really change the strategy that much, you want to be a bit tighter, but you can still profitably call quite wide. This would be a good game if you’re looking to profit, but yeah, find a better game if you’re just playing for enjoyment and actually want to play a flop.

If we’re talking about multiple players going all in on most hands, that’s a bit different.

The more players that are going all in with any 2 cards pre-flop, the better it is for you. You’ll win the hand less often, but win N times as much when you do. The increase in winning is always greater than the decrease in your odds. If one player was shoving any 2 cards and another called with the top 50% of hands, you make the most by calling with just under the top 25% of hands.

In cash games, you can call wide against any number of maniacs, but you do want to tighten up a bit for each one that enters the pot. A table like that is a dream scenario in terms of profitability though - even though it’s hardly the most enjoyable poker.

In tournaments there’s will be diminishing returns - the extra chips in the pot won’t translate directly into extra winnings, and it’s often hard to quantify what you’re losing if you bust. That spot really sucks in tournaments for sure. It doesn’t really change the range you should be playing much though. If the money in the pot if worth the considerable risk of busting out, you should be calling quite wide, and if it’s not you should be folding. That will sometimes include kings and maybe even aces, which is why it’s such a bad spot, because you basically can’t play anything. So yeah, definitely find a better game in that situation.

1 Like

That made sense even to me :upside_down_face: Thanks!