50 NL | 55 -> good move?
 

PokerStars Game #13377992760: Hold'em No Limit ($0.25/$0.50) - 2007/11/21 - 12:32:35 (ET)
Table 'Stebbins' 9-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: delgados ($61.10 in chips)
Seat 2: Günther1986 ($29.85 in chips)
Seat 3: nick lesson ($61.55 in chips)
Seat 4: SKIBI_T1 ($17.50 in chips)
Seat 5: hyoyang ($66.10 in chips)
Seat 6: ILetUMuck ($47 in chips)
Seat 7: Sharif24 ($17 in chips)
SKIBI_T1: posts small blind $0.25
hyoyang: posts big blind $0.50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to ILetUMuck [5d 5s]
ILetUMuck: calls $0.50
Sharif24: folds
delgados: folds
Günther1986: calls $0.50
nick lesson: raises $1.50 to $2
SKIBI_T1: folds
hyoyang: folds
ILetUMuck: calls $1.50
Günther1986: calls $1.50
*** FLOP *** [Jd 7h 3h]
ILetUMuck: checks
Günther1986: bets $3
nick lesson: folds
ILetUMuck: calls $3
*** TURN *** [Jd 7h 3h] [As]
ILetUMuck: checks
Günther1986: bets $4
ILetUMuck: raises $10 to $14

villian is 47 4 19 over 90 hands

Re: 50 NL | 55 -> good move?
 

I feel you get reraised or called too much to make this reasonable, although villains stats are pretty wacky. I'd look at whether his high aggression factor is a result of betting almost everything and never folding, or checking/folding/betting all the time, and I'd be more inclined to bluff the folding station. In general, though, I'd fold the flop.

The guy is donk-betting into 2 people on the flop after calling in the big blind, and follows up on the turn again. Ill-time fancy plays like these seem to cost more money than they're worth.

I'd prefer it if you had a semi-bluffing hand like 2 hearts or OESD. You might as well have 24o or 62o at this point in the hand.