Aces with Flushdraw vs Raise

If you have any somewhat reliable info that he is making moves in such a spot then raise turn. Otherwise it's a fold IMO. I guess it depends on how is the villain looking at us. If he sees us as weak regs, the play is ok.

If he is standard NL2 player post-flop, Turn is more likely bet/fold. His range consists of sets/flushes, so we aren't most likely alive there on turn. We don't have good implied odds either, as our flush-draw would be quite obvious on this board.

However, I think you should have betted bigger on flop and turn in this spot - they are calling the same hands that they are calling now and you are losing some value against TP-type of hands these guys might have. If villain is aggro, then you small turn bet might even had induced him to raise you off. But overall players are passive on NL2 and this line is the nuts, so bet/fold turn seems reasonable with bigger sizing.

Hi SvenBe,

Before I answer your question I'd like to challenge a few things.

First, what's going on with the bet size on flop and turn?

Why are we betting so small on both streets versus someone that looks like a reg/fish? I doubt that you will get more calls by betting half pot or less and in fact you could be inducing raises (which makes folding the turn hard).

I would bet at least 2/3 pot here.

You also have 440 hands on the opponent so I would look at how aggro he is (I'm assuming not that much) and any other relevant info.

As played the river should indeed be a ck/fold. We beat nothing that bets 42 BB there.

In my experience call flop, raise later street is almost always a very strong hand on these stakes. There are some aggressive opponents who would do this with a draw, so most of the time I'd fold, but against a guy who I know is aggro I shove. Calling looks kind of pointless except against some crazy who bluffs a lot with any hand.

Why bet so small on the flop and the turn? Shows the hero as a fish!

It's true that in general people are playing passive and they aren't check/calling flop and check/raising turn with air or thin value that often in NL2. But villain line looks a bit suspicious to me.

First of all, I'm not sure about villains tendencies in fullring games, but is tight villain even calling here with KQs preflop vs UTG-opener? I'f he isn't, how often villain has a flush here? Since we have the ace of diamonds and we assume that our villain is not calling preflop with KQs, villain never has a flush. And with sets (JJ/88/33) villain is pretty much always raising on the flop, since the flop is so wet. So what is villains calling range on the flop? I'd say it's something like AJs, 99/TT, 66 or 77 with a flush draw maybe, and some flouts like AxQd. We're beating all these hands. Once villain raises the turn, I'd take AJs, and 99/TT out of villains range. To me it looks like that villain could have something like 66/77 with a flush draw, which villain is turning into a bluff, or those flouts with a flushdraw.

Someone might say that I'm going too far, and in micros villain always has a weirdly played set or something, and we're never good here. But since we're UTG-opener, and villain is UTG+1, I just don't see villain having a flush. Same with sets, on this board villain is really often raising with those sets. So I'd call on the turn, and call any river.

And why on earth we should raise here? I don't see ANY point.