QTs Turned flush vs. Raise

What about check/calling the turn and check/calling river if another club doesn't hit and board doesn't pair? Not sure what would be the best play there. We block AcTc, AcQc and KcQc. He probably has AcKc and KcJc in his range, if he is not 3betting AcKc pre and if he is calling KcJc, which all can be true due to the fact that we are deep. There are not worse flushes in his range (7c6c makes a straight flush and I doubt he is calling 4c3c-3c2c), so when we bet, I think folding is fine because he is probably not raising sets. Although, he plays 43/36 over the sample size so might be a kind of player that might raise sets and sometime maybe AcX or 98. Anyway, bet/folding is probably the safest move and most likely optimal, imo.

I can see more bad hands doing fancy moves since you are deep.
I think it is wrong to call flop raise and hope you hit a flush and then fold when you hit it.

I would play it passive from flop.
I do not like the turn fold. Why did you call the flop raise then?

My play would be check call ott. If it is a better flush you spend less money, otherwise a bluff can continue and he wont always check behind with his sets

Originally posted by nitrol
I would play it passive from flop.
I do not like the turn fold. Why did you call the flop raise then?

Exactly, there is no other reason to call flop raise. It is like you changed the story of villain from bluff-set to A-high flush move

I agree with taking passive line OTT, and eventually OTR, by x/c. I don't like turn play when hero made hand turn into bluff.
Ask yourself, which hands would you raise mw on FD board OTB?

On the turn: The thing here is that you have only one street of value. (The only reason to bet is to "protect" against A♣:X hands.) He'll fire himself to "protect" his hand or for whatever reason (perhaps he'll pay to draw with A♣:X himself) . If he checks back OTT, you can get your street of value on the river. If a falls off, well, that would be unfortunate, but he'll only be drawing to seven :club:, and the combination of him having A♣:/K♣: and a coming is rare. A river is really a separate problem - and I have ran out of coffee.

That's the point. I initially called the flop vs. twopairs and sets, so that if I hit my flush I can extract value by betting turn and river (if not paired). I don't think that we will get more value by check/calling turn and river. Some guys are too passive to bet sets for another two streets. So I lead out here, in order to maximize the value vs worse (especially Sets). I disagree that we can't get another 2 streets. I would definitely fire another 1/2 pot bet (at the most) on the river to make him pay with worse, and most likely he will.

Because we are deep, his preflop-calling range probably widens to all Axs, which he can raise on the flop too. But in general, I think people rather flat their draws multiway. Now, I think calling the turnraise is bad. Why? We can easily represent a flush (and probably have it almost all of the time by taking this line). Therefore Villain shouldn't be raising his sets here (doesn't make any sense, right?) and his raising-range should consist of better flushes only because he should be afraid of the Nutflush himself.

It seems inconsistent to fold the turn. But the part of his range that is raising here beats us. Other question: Would you call the worst Full-House on a random river after value-raising thinly and facing a jam?

A question for you: You are on the button. You play exactly like BU here. You flop something you like for some reason, and when UTG fires flop 3-handed, you raise. BB folds and UTG calls. Now another comes OTT. The board is

8♣:2♠:5♣:9♣:

UTG now donks!

What is villain's range after this action?

UTG is, like you, deep.

Pretty much always on 's. But there are other factors which come into play: Opponents fall in love with their hand and are not folding. Or they are simply on tilt and don't fold because they run bad anyways. I saw guys play this spot very bad so it doesn't matter THAT much imo what our perceived range is. But I think I see your point: Do you believe villains rather fire two barrels themselves if checked to and fold tight if we bet turn and river on a blank?

We cannot assume that all players are on tilt or play bad...

Originally posted by MisterSnS
...
But I think I see your point: Do you believe villains rather fire two barrels themselves if checked to and fold tight if we bet turn and river on a blank?

No, as I wrote in my OP was that we have one street of value, not two. If you check, your hand is disguised, but if you bet it is not. I am trying to say that winning one bet is better than winning zero bets.