Where should I fold this hand??? Since I should, right????
Thinking about vilian range, my concern was A5 as well as small pocket pairs, but on this levels vilians play so many trash and speculative hands that I might be also against two overcards or midlle pocket pair. Thats why I deceided to 4bet flop.

My turn bet was crazy . I was probably angry that I did not push out the guy from the pot otf ......yeah I know like its sounds ,like in the title, I was blinded by my aces. As I calmed down and analyse this hand I see how fishy I played it

raise more pre
get it in post

I think you played it okay. You could bet more preflop, but aside from that you did quite alright.

At those levels you might get lucky and get V to fold pre flop with a larger raise but there is nothing you could do to make anyone fold post flop. You could of did better to control the size of the pot post flop and lose the minimum instead of lose the maximum.

Folding at any point in this hand with this stack depth would be awful. The only mistake made was not raising more pre. Other than that... Don't sweat it... Cooler.

Why would you want your opponent to fold preflop when you have Aces?

Wow, I was sure I played it badly.
It shows me how much I have to learn still.
I played this hand instinctively, but after show down when I analysed it I thought that I made a mistake on turn since vilian acted exactly how he supposed to act having a set.

Thanks guys for your replies. I really fill better now

I should really review my posts before posting as you are right that you wouldn't want them to fold preflop.

What about after the flop? The Villian did a min bet and then the hero did a nice large raise. When the Villian called, would you not suspect that your beaten right there? Thinking of hand ranges of small pair for a set and or 56s for the straight and back door flush.

Might of been better to check the turn and wait for the river play.

Thats was my thougts too. Unfortunately to late, I mean I realized it after I played this hand, when I cooled down.

I wouldnt bet so large if I expect to be beaten when called with such a strong hand. With that said I wouldnt bet quite as much, but given stakes and no reads and all, I dont mind.

Villain could have all pps, this includes sets but also way more hands which you crush. 5x, 4x, Ax and even every now and then something really stupid like KQ.

Ronny,
first of all I really appreciate your help, as I mentioned before, I felt much better after reading your opinion about this hand.

But let me be a little defiant
I wonder when you last time played on lowest levels???? I assume you are playing much higher stakes games. I'm asking since all the time somebody post a hand where a big pair is lays down without showdown there are always replies like:
I would newer fold kings at this level.......
Without strong reads I would never fold quins here........
Vilians might here play bunch of trash do not fold aces and this spot ever....
yada,yada,yada....

I wonder, just wonder.... if you regs somehow underestimate today's micro stakes players. Game evolves a lot during last 2-3 years. I always plays on lowest limit (because of my bankrol) and agree that there are a lot of fish there ,but there are lot,lot less fishes than used to be even one year ago.
According my experience more and more often if vilian act like he has a hand he represented even in micros he actually have it. Actually I believe that pure bluffs are really rare here.

That is my concern. I reaped one more time I do not want to criticize anybody. You guys are great and this forum is full of great people eager to help for greens like me. Just wonder how much of your knowledge about plays on lowest limits comes from times you used to play it and how much is really up to date???

I guess I am a bit surprised that you are at 60/120 blind level and you have no reads on villain. I would want to know that before judging whether or not this was a bad play. If villain was a complete aggro idiot, I think you played this well. If villain was an uber-nit, then villain's flop play might raise some alarm bells to you that you might be in bad shape.

I have played thousands of $1.50s - the games are challenging for you because you are still learning, just as they were for me. But if a high stakes reg played at this level, I think it is fair to say they would be pretty profitable - they would know how to better exploit the population than you do. That's not a negative towards you, just more to say keep working hard to learn and improve and you will start to see holes in opponents' strategies.

Well, I have no idea how the play at your stakes is nowadays. And Im sure thats true for most regs here.

But one can guess. I dont play much higher than you, 7-15$, but there are plenty of horrible players at these stakes too. And those who are not, are very often regs or semi-regs. Who you know after a short while.

Basically, if you dont post any reads, we will all assume that villain is unkown. If villain is unkown the likelyhood of him being bad is very high (and the lower the stake the more likely that is true). And bad players usually call to much and in this hand, given preflop action he can have tons of hands.

You are only beaten by A5 (8), 22 (3), 33 (1), 44 (3), 65 (16), thats 31 combos. Now a couple hands you beat, A4 (8), K4s (3), Q4s (3), K5s (4), Q5s (4), 54 (12), 55 (6), 66 (6), 77 (6), thats 52 combos. And the list you beat is expandable, while the list that beats you is fixed. Now there is an ICM factor here and all, so he has to have a good bunch more hands you beat but really, I need a read here not to want to get it in.

And once again, if you feel that you played your hand so strong that only hands that beat you can play back, you need to adjust your play.

OK, fair enough.
If even 15$ stakes are plenty of horrible player there is no question that my aggressive play in this spot will be profitable against random players on 1,5$ in long run.
Thank you guys for analysis and detailed explanation.

Stop posting results, it's skewing the answers you get here. If villain showed up with 85o every post would say wp, nh, but when he has a better hand suddenly guys want to change their play. Raising more pre to 'push out' worse hands is face-palm worthy and by that I mean people suggesting it should punch themselves squarely in the face.

Of course villain had a set, it's soooo obvious once the cards are turned over.

Errm, no. His flop play was terrible and very "un-set like." I'm not a huge fan of your overbet flop raise (It's a raise, not a 4bet), but once we get to the turn I'm certainly betting for value and not folding to a shove. There's absolutely nothing 'crazy' about betting the turn, the only crazy thing is ignore logic and put him squarely on hands that beat you based on fear.

Losing a hand or getting it in behind doesn't mean we played bad, just how winning a hand or getting it in ahead doesn't mean we played well. We're always playing against a range and in this spot, our hand crushes his range -- it just so happened that he turned up a better hand.

That's probably the point

This is something I hear a lot from guys in lower stakes and I'll prob expand on it on my next Twitch broadcast, but the short answer is that there are bad recs in all stakes. People of all income levels like to play poker, and some of the richest ones are capable of being just as bad (if not worse) than some of the guys in micro stakes. So while I haven't played more than a handful of micro stake SNGs in several years, I surely have experience playing postflop with weaker players.

When guys say "I wouldn't fold Aces, etc" here in a lower buy-in game, that's because they correctly assume that since unknowns in lower stakes tend to be a bit looser, they'll have a wider range on all streets and be more willing to pay off with mediocre hands. Obviously those players still exist in higher stakes, but sometimes the random in my games is some MTT crusher and that pretty much never happens in $1.50s.

I lastly want to draw attention to the bolded part which I reposted here:

Not sure how there can be less fish in these games, as in order for a 9 man SNG to run you'll need 9 guys and I'm almost positive that at least 8 of them are always fish. Even the 'regs' are terrible and if by chance there's some guy currently murdering the $1.50s for 10% ROI, he'd probably be a fish at $30s+. Point is, the micros are still as soft as ever.

Well isn't that that whole point. Fish is relative to the Hero playing in the game. While abarone for example might be a "fish" to me, he is another player's "strong reg".

Fair enough, but would you say that $1 players have significantly improved in the last few years? Personally I think it's a cop out.

I'm not sure about the $1 players in general but the overall micro/lower stake player pool has probably improved based on all staking stables that operate within these stakes. There are also a lot more players these days willing to make a living for ~$10 or whatever the average hourly is at these stakes than back in the day when we first started playing online poker. Add in the advancement in software and more players using it and the average skill level in these games has probably improved at the very least slightly during last few years. Hasn't it at most limits?

I totally agree with you that it's a cop out if you're going to use that as an excuse. There is definitely a lot of room for improvement for the majority of these micro players, myself, and players from all stakes and ability in poker. The game is always evolving and you can either focus on getting better and improving your game or be left in the dust.

Twitch broadcast......what's this????

Thank you for this post. ACB is always dictatorial in his opinion. I'm not saying it is bad since me personally took huge benefit from his advices. I see many improvement in my game since I started post on this forum and implemented tips people gave me here. Wast majority of this tips came from ACB
I cant argue with him since he is big player comparing to me but sometimes I feel as he a litle underestimate todays low limit players abilities and concerning 99% of them as a fish I'm also a micro stake players and eather Im part of this 99% or (if I'm not) there are more capable players There too.
Thats why I appreciated your point of wiew which is very nice balance to ACB strict opinion

On a flop like that against an opponent that could basically have any 2 cards, I don't like the lines you take at all. I think you should have be a lot more conservative and try to control the size of the pot. It's probably better just to call down to the river in position because your hands are so vulnerable to the type of trash hands that this guy is holding. 22,33,44,A5, 23, 24, 56 which are all in his range..

I like the idea of slightly more PF here, if vill is willing to limp/call our min-raise OOP then he is also very likely to call our raise to 285, 299, etc. What this also does is discourages these donk-bets OTF which sort of muddles our game play a bit. Our 2x PF sort of looks like button-clicking, so vill will be slightly less likely to check to the PFR post-flop.

I wouldn't hate flatting flop and keeping pot under control and re-evaluating turn. I just don't love raising this flop and looking to get stacks in because vill's range is capped PF which really strengthens his GII range on this sort of board. Also vill has around 20bb OTF, so he isn't desperate and may find reasonable folds with many of his one-pair hands. This means that vill's GII range is straighs/sets/29 and maybe stuff like 1P+OESD/55-88. We are not in very good shape against this range. So at the 20bb level on this flop, I'm not raising because I'm not comfortable GII.

Honestly, I've seen people donk gii 20bb deep with mid pair no kicker.