Game #1481873272: Table €4 NL - 0.02/0.04 - No Limit Hold'Em - 11:34:19 2021/05/04
*** Seated players ***
Seat 2: Villain1 (€2.50)
Seat 3: Villain 2 (€4.06)
Seat 4: Hero (€4.37)
Seat 5: Villain 3 (€6.76) (sitting out)
*** Blinds and button ***
Villain 2 has the button
Hero posts small blind €0.02
Villain1 posts big blind €0.04
*** Hole cards ***
Dealt to Hero [Ah Jc]
Dealt in Villain1
Dealt in Villain 2
*** Preflop ***
Villain 2 raises €0.10 to €0.10
Hero raises €0.40 to €0.42
Villain1 folds
Villain 2 calls €0.32
*** Flop *** [Qc Td 3c]
Total pot [€0.86]
Hero bets €0.40
Villain 2 calls €0.40
*** Turn *** [Qc Td 3c] [Jh]
Total pot [€1.65]
Hero bets €0.86
Villain 2 calls €0.86
*** River *** [Qc Td 3c] [Jh] [5c]
Total pot [€3.33]
Hero bets €2.69, and is all-in
Villain 2 folds

Flop is fine, I might go a bit lower, but 1/2 pot is fine. Turn, once you hit second pair, I think the only worse hands you're targeting are flush draws, so I don't think the bet is great. Also, and perhaps more importantly, if you're betting a hand as weak as second pair here, what hands are you checking that can call 1 bet, never mind 2? River bet I don't think is great either. I think you could get some folds out of a few better hands, maybe Q9s if villain has it, maybe KQ, and maybe AQ. I think for this bet to be profitable, you'd at least have to get folds out KQ and villain would have to take this line with KQo (which would be a pretty reasonable fold pre). If the lowest offsuit Kx he calls pre is AQo, I think you'd need folds from AQ. Otherwise, you're just folding out hands you had beat anyway. Again, the point from previously applies: if you are raising with this hand, what hands are you checking that can call a bet? If you are betting all better hands, this is actually the bigger leak, as you have no hands you check which can call a bet.

Overall, I think this hand will be much more profitable as a check on both turn and river, and you can call one bet (but probably not 2) with it. You will have some worse hands which you can use as bluffs (like 99, 88, 87s, KTs, T9s, ATs, any club SCs...) which have more to gain as bluffs (as they will fold out a higher number of better hands). Also, if you are betting this, it seems like you might be taking this line with just about all of your range, and your checking range on turn or river will be very weak if you're betting all better hands than this one. On the plus side, this board is so good for your range that, if you were going to get out of line at the micros, this is one of the best boards to do so. You should also have relatively few natural bluffs (as such a high proportion of your range will have at least one pair), so even though your hand isn't ideal, it won't actually be too bad. I think this play will make you pretty unbalanced in this spot, but I also feel like this is a good spot to be unbalanced at the micros.

Yeah, I think I agree with pretty much all of this (KQ isn't a fold pre 3 handed though)

and although I was playing too many tables to randomize this spot, I usually use a randomizer to decide my x check range so I'll have a turn range that can withstand pressure on most runouts

Also, from villains POV, shouldn't AQ/KQ (especially with a club) be a better river call than his two pairs? So maybe the J is bad card to bluff with? Would be alot worse if it wasn't a club I assume

Tbh, I think using a randomiser postflop at the micros may be overdoing it, but if you're able to make it work, it's not a bad thing.

In terms of AQ/KQ being better calls, I think it wouldn't be unreasonable to take your line with 2 pair hands, so I think QJ would have a chance of being ahead of part of your value range, it would be a better call in that respect (although that isn't the case with JT). If 2 pair aren't part of your value range, then AQ/KQ decrease the value range by 6 combos, and 2 pair hands by 4 combos. However, A and K are also the most likely cards for you to bluff with, so I'm not sure that the unblocker effects don't counteract that. Not too sure if JT is a better calling hand than AQ based on that (although I do think QJ is the best of them all, as you should be unlikely to bluff with either of those cards). When in doubt, I tend to call with the hands that have the strongest absolute value.

Also, if they have a , it would be either the Ac or Kc, and those are probably the cards villain most wants you to have, so I'd say those specific combos are the worst AQ/KQ combos to bluff catch with. I also think you may be giving villain too much credit for the depth of thought they'll have when choosing which hands to call with, I reckon it is safe to assume their calling range here will be linear and purely based on hand strength.

Just ran a quick sim, solver does prefer calling two pair over KQ/AQ for the reason that, as you mentioned, taking this line with 2 pair myself is reasonable.

However, calling down with (Ac/Kc)Q is a decent amount better than calling down with AQ/KQ W/O Ac or Kc. I assume this is is because pretty much all of my AcX hands have now either made a flush/straight or just want to showdown (ATo being my only AcX bluff, if I have it).

As for my line with this particular hand, flop and turn are just about fine but river is a massive punt because like you said once the flush comes in I'm really not going to get many/any folds from better hands (especially at micros). Solver much prefers x folding river since you still have a bit of showdown value against a hand like KJ that villain may x back.

Think this mainly confirms what you originally said