2/2 EUR, six-handed table.

Probably super-standard, but I am not really sure if the turn gives me max value or if there is some merit to trickery.

Hero - LAG image, been running over the table quite a lot, since a lot of players are playing quite weak-tight. Started out by punting a stack on a Q high board to AQ (I held KQ but mucked) and then doubling up a shortstack (AA vs AQ, I mucked), but since then I have been winning.

Last large pot I played I stacked another player in a hand that went like this: I raise JJ to 12 from the BB against a limper, Straddle claims he wanted to call but put in two chips for a raise to 22, I make it 54, he calls. Flop is J33, I check, V bets 24, I tank for 10-15 seconds and call. Turn 5, check-check. River K, I slam 3x50 chips on the table, villain calls (I thought he had less, turns out he had 156 EUR so should have slammed four chips instead) and mucks.

Villain - playing tight, not getting involved in a lot of pots so far. Has not played too many pots postfop, seams to he on the weaktight side of things. With 90% certainty he does not think in terms of ranges etc., but only his hand/the current pot that he is playing.

Stack sizes:
Villain - 180
Hero - 600

Hand:
Villain raises to 8 after a limper from MP, one calls, I call from the BB with A8, limper calls.

Flop: (Pot: 32)
Q 7 5
Checks to Villain.
Villain bets 20.
Folds to me with one player behind, I call 20.
Player behind folds.

Turn: (Pot: 72)
Q 7 5 K
I lead 44. (Villain has slightly less than 150 behind. If called I intend to ship all rivers.)

Line/Donkbet good?

Honestly I don't know what the consensus will be on your donk-lead when you turn the nuts, but I like it.

Yes it turns your hand face up to a lot of villains, but in low stakes live games so much of the player pool is very passive, and at these stakes nothing scares villains away from betting their hand than when the flush draw comes in. From game theory standpoint this is very exploitable and it's difficult to have much balance here when you take this line, but of course that really doesn't matter much at LLS.

Unless you're playing against a somewhat aggressive opponent, such a large portion of the average player pool is going to check back their entire non-flush range in this spot, so I actually do like donk-leading sometimes and denying them the ability to get to a cheap showdown. Plus when taking stack sizes into consideration, this is probably the best way to set-up a reasonable river shove. Again, not sure how most will feel about this line, but I personally like it in your average passive LLS game.

Yeah, GTO isn´t really an issue at these stakes/these opponents. In theory, I should be able to make this play with some naked Ah combos, in reality versus this opponent though I am pretty sure that I am only ever leading this turn for value.

branch0095, your analysis is more or less the exact reasoning for me to lead this turn in this spot - Villain will check back a lot of hands that might call a bet on the turn. And what do I do on the river? Check-raise all-in? Bet? What hands would fold to a turn bet, but then bet-call the river? And if it goes check-check, what hands would fold to a turn bet, but call the same bet on the river? And if he flopped or turned a big hand, a fourth heart will kill my action.

Good post, with mostly well thought through valid points.

But yeah, very important note that if your villain has any clue at all of what he is doing and is a non drooler this line turn your hand faceup. Check-calling flop passive line and then lead out with a serious bet when the flushdraw comes in is such a classic line rec-players go for all the times, because they have experienced that its hard to get payed off when good players uses position to take a free card off instead of continue betting.

Part of the solution of the fact that its hard to getting paid off good with flushdraws OOP, its to play these draws aggressively a good portion of the time with a check-raise, instead of taking the old passive check-call line with the obvious draws.

I agree with this, but for a check-raise to be good I need to have some fold equity and I had a feeling that this villain would stack of with TPGK type of hands and if I raise there is no way I am folding to a re-raise. Considering I have been playing LAG and betting a lot, I was sure of some people calling me down quite light in bigger pots (as the pot grows people are less likely to fold, since they "already put so much in" and "he could be bluffing" and "I have two pair I can never fold") and this is in some parts good (since it allows for me to c/c and then leads with nuts and get paid off) and in some parts bad (since it is harder to run profitable semi-bluffs in bigger pots). On the other hand, re-raising and getting it in is never reallly a bad play there on the flop (at least not this shallow).

Against a villain that leans weak/tight this is not a situation for trying to stack villain. It's trying to figure out how to get paid enough to justify your flop call.

Leading turn is OK on the scare card because villain is going to check back so much of his range but I would go smaller. $30 on the turn and then $50 on the river. I would also check turn some of the time and then lead river for $35 or so.

The call preflop is marginal in this situation because villain is weak/tight and not particularly deep. With A8s your best hands are almost always flushes and it's hard to get paid OOP.

Player behind me who limp-called pre had something like 350 behind, second villain (who folded to the flop bet) had something like 120, but in this line-up I would not fold A8s to a standard raise. A large part of the table were very weak-tight and passive in smaller pots, but these types of villains do tend to get sticky when pots get larger.

Anyway, I figure that I should be able to stack all two-pair and sets if I bet, and if I am lucky and Villain barreled AK on the flop (unlikely though) he might talk himself into calling two streets with AK, thinking I might have something like AhQx that I turn into a bluff (or whatever).

But I still feel that betting here is the best play. (For the record, I know that one of the thinking players at the table will have noticed this play and I will make sure to lead into him on scarecards with bluffs/semibluffs next time we play, if I have the opportunity.)

I am donk betting the flop here alot of the time, but I like to lead on some of my draws, and try to disguise when the draw comes through. I am especailly doing this against a V, that only looks at his hand and not worried about ranges. If c/c the flop, and lead the turn against this player, you may as well turn your hand face up. If you can tell the story that the heart is a scare card for you, you may get V to make a small bet on the turn and then you can lead almost any river. I dont think you could get his stack in, but if you lead out the $20 on the flop, a checked turn, may let V bet around $45 and you could lead the river for about $60. If V checks the turn behind, you probably are not getting any more money from V anyway, unless he hits trips or a straight. But, unless I am against a super nit, I am leading flop.

Line seems fine provided that if called, we shove all non-heart rivers.

Thanks for the replies. Yes, my plan was to shove the river if called.

Results:
Villain thinks for a short while, looks about to call but then shoves instead, he had KQ for turned top two pair.

You say you’ve been playing LAG and then take a bunch of passive actions.

Calling A8s OOP from the BB is a leak.

3! or fold pre. You don’t win money playing passively.

Preflop flat is fine.

I like the flat call on the flop especially if the other villain is deep. I don't want to raise and get into an awkward position with the other player. And if we hit we can still get paid because of our spewy image.

The turn donk works really well because his stack size is perfect to jam over the top of us and its way scarier if we c/r allin.