Only 50 hands on villain but he is looking very Loose Passive: 49/7/1.2 His turn raise is fairly strong in my estimation. With our NFD on top of our TPTK how do we proceed from here?

I will try to turn this into a play along on the river becuase I think that is another decision point based on how I played the turn.

[converted_hand][hand_history]Merge, $0.50/$1 Limit Hold'em Cash, 5 Players
Poker Tools Powered By Holdem Manager - The Ultimate Poker Software Suite.

Preflop: Hero is BTN with K A
2 folds, Hero raises, SB folds, BB calls

Flop: (4.5 SB) 4 Q 2 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets, BB calls

Turn: (3.3 BB) A (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets, BB raises, Hero?

Against such a passive villain, I don't see any way to play it other than calldown.

obv raise heart river (actually bet, b/c i'm sure he'll check to you)

Yeah...I should have just posted river since that was my real Q. I guess the turn is a pretty standard calldown. Here is the reason I actually wanted to post this hand.

[converted_hand][hand_history]Merge, $0.50/$1 Limit Hold'em Cash, 5 Players
Poker Tools Powered By Holdem Manager - The Ultimate Poker Software Suite.

Preflop: Hero is BTN with K A
2 folds, Hero raises, SB folds, BB calls

Flop: (4.5 SB) 4 Q 2 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets, BB calls

Turn: (3.3 BB) A (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets, BB raises, Hero calls

River: (7.3 BB) A (2 players)
BB bets, Hero ?

I am leaning to calling but wonder if an argument can be made for raising. The more I look at this hand I am thinking that call is the easy answer but would like to hear other peoples thought. I'm not so sure the Ace has really changed anything for me.

How often do you think that he's making plays like this with only an A? PFR 7 and AF 1.2 suggest to me that he might be more aggro post, but its only 50 hands.... I could see him playing something like AT this way, esp w. the Th.

He certainly could have weaker aces, but he also may not even c/r AJ on this turn. He would with 22, 44, 35, XhXh however, all of wich are cerainly in his range. He even still has AQ in his range since he's so passive pre. I'd just call.

I think that the ace has probably made your chances somewhat worse since there now there are fewer ways for Villain to have Ax.

Still, it is a little bit encouraging that, as AliQ90 pointed out, Villain's short-term 1.2 AF suggests he might not be as passive postflop as his preflop 49/7 indicates. But I'm not feeling so encouraged that I'm thinking I'm a favorite to win at showdown, let alone enough of a favorite to make up for the times we get 3-bet. So I would just call.

Calling the turn seems reasonable based on the description provided. If you think Villain needs a good hand for his checkraise then who am I to argue?

Having drawn that conclusion I wouldn't touch a river raise with a 10-foot pole. Your nut flush draw is dead and half of the Ax hands you beat no longer exist. That Q4, Q2, and 42 just got crushed doesn't begin to make up for that, especially since these hands usually checkraise the flop.

You thought your turn equity wasn't good enough? It's much worse here on the river.

Make your crying call and hope for the best.

P.S.: Nick, who cares about being 3-bet? It's not like you need to payoff. He expects you to have a big ace and he expects you to call. Your chance of being good after being 3-bet by this guy on a paired 3-flush board isn't worth mentioning.

You're probably right. But the river value raise followed by a fold to a 3-bet was never a specialty of mine. I usually didn't trust my judgment enough for that.

In this particular case (if I raised and got 3-bet), I'd probably start wondering how possible it was that my fishy opponent on whom I had a fuzzy read was a Level Zero hand reader in love with his worse trips. (I have played with those guys, although I doubt very many of them show up at Merge.) Or if I really went into the tank and was desperate for a reason to call, I might wonder if the aggressive play all around my opponent was frustrating him and if he had finally on this deal gotten something (turned top pair, rivered trips) with which to fight back. (It's possible that the phenomenon of a fish lashing back at aggression is not illustrated very plausibly by this hand because of the level of big-street aggression and because of the 3-flush board. But, generally, the phenomenon of a fish clumsily breaking out of his passive shell in apparent reaction to the aggression around him was something I was noticing more and more at the tables around the time of Black Friday.)

Maybe the possibility of getting 3-bet by an inferior hand is remote enough that the possibility doesn't add in any significant way to the cost of a river raise-fold. But the Level Zero player in me would look at his top trips and start having doubts.

In short, it would be a bigger mistake for me to raise the river in the posted hand than for you to do so since I would likely add to my mistake by calling a 3-bet if it came . But at least I compensate a little bit for this leak by taking it into account before raising in the first place .

Um I think I would call the river. I would feel icky raising then calling a 3! Actaully looking at the hand again I would definatly just call the river given the Turn action.
These line by the villain make me question my reads, and I always ask if I could have saved a bet if I trusted my read if I lose.