Preflop there have been two calls before you act, so I might make a case for you betting slightly larger than 180. Maybe 240, although I don’t hate your 180 bet if you were playing against good competition (which it appears is not the case). 180 ensures you will get at least one call, which is what you want, but 240 looks like a squeeze which might get the desired possibility of only one call or even better a re-raise if someone thinks you are squeezing slightly light or if they have a big but inferior hand to aces.

The fact that you get four calls seems pretty fishy, which I guess is to be expected in a freeroll against weak competition. It seems unlikely that your raise gets four calls on a seven-handed table in a real money tournament with better competition. That said, the fact that four people have called you means you have to proceed with caution after the flop even with aces. While you are a clear cut favorite against any one opponent preflop, I’ve got to believe that you are nonetheless an underdog to all four of the opponents cumulatively preflop.

When the flop comes three hearts, of which you have none meaning you have no blockers, you have to consider the possibility that one of your opponents has already made their flush. If you had at least flopped trips at least you would have the equity of hitting a full house on the turn or river if either pairs the board. If you had the ace of hearts then at least you’d have the equity of possibly making the nut flush on the turn or river. The fact that the BB bets pot after the flop with three players to act makes me think he has you beat. Plus there is more action to act behind you. I would probably fold. I get that you can’t just call since that would leave you with not a lot of chips with further action still to follow behind you, not to mention turn and river bets to come. Nonetheless, you have no fold equity when you go all-in. So if you aren’t going to fold, then I guess calling or going all-in are essentially the same thing. For all the reasons I have mentioned, once three hearts hit on the flop your A-A (no hearts) as strong as it was preflop has been turned into a bluff or bluff catcher after the flop.

The fact that MP1 played Jh 6c the way they did is pretty horrible preflop and postflop. The fact that they got there on the river to win the hand doesn’t take away the fact that they played the hand horrendously. If people are playing this loosely and this poorly, it points to a few things to me. First, there are going to be great spots against these players, which points to the fact that you don’t want to overplay AA on a wet flop that is three to a flush. Different story if the board is dry on the flop (2-6-J rainbow for example). Second, if everyone is call happy (I can’t say for sure without watching previous hands, but this hand points to your opponents being very, very call happy) then maybe my earlier comment about raising bigger preflop when there have already been two calls before your bet makes even more sense.

One last thought. Playing in freerolls can be dangerous to your growth as a poker player. The way people play in freerolls (fake money) tournaments is completely different than they way people play in online or live real money tournaments. In freerolls your opponents often just want to get it in (good or bad, it doesn’t matter to them) so that if they get lucky they have a big stack, and if they lose all their chips no big deal they can just register for another freeroll/fake money tourney. If you get used to playing really bad players it will be counterproductive to knowing how to play against better players. I’m not suggesting that you start playing in real money tournaments that are beyond your financial comfort level, but given that you have shown enough interest to sign up for a training site to improve your game, you have to recognize that the type of play you see in freerolls has virtually nothing to do with what you will see in real money tournaments.

The way you play bad players is completely different than the way you play good players. A case in point is the home game I play in. It is the lowest possible stakes meant solely to be a social gathering of friends who are mostly poor players. There is one other player in the game besides me who is pretty good (not elite but solid). Then there are a couple of players who are below average but not horrendous who think they are better than they are. Then there are several players who are terrible. We play dealers choice with the deal rotating around the table. At the end of the night we sometimes play a tournament. It is a total minefield. Against the one good player I have to play one way. Against the below average but not horrendous players I have to play another way. The hardest guys to play are the truly horrendous players because you never have any idea what they have (they will play any two cards and just gamble, or they’ll treat third-best pair like the nuts meaning your premium hands are usually good against them but every once in a while they will play 2-7 from early position and flop trip twos on a 2-2-9 rainbow flop). My point is that nothing that makes sense in a real live tournament setting applies, and nothing that is taught on this training site applies. 

A couple of additional thoughts Maniackid. Whereas the training videos on TPE seem to recommend raising 2x to 2.2x preflop, I think against players who are call happy with weak to medium holdings you probably want to be raising 3x to punish them for calling way too widely. If you do this, down the road you will have to adjust this betting size when you move up in stakes against better players who will try to push you out of the pot postflop, resulting in you losing more chips if you raised 3x preflop instaead of 2.0x – 2.2x. But against bad, loose players who will call with any two cards, I think it makes sense to charge them a 3x tax to punish them for calling too widely. You do this by patiently waiting for quality hands and then bloating the pot with 3x bets.

Also, you want to identify bat-sh*t crazy players and try to isolate against them when you have premium hands. Ideally, the bat-sh*t crazy player is to your immediate left and you get paid when you have premium hands as well as slightly less than premium hands that are still ahead of his massively wide range. I am currently watching a series of videos on TPE by Mike Leah in stage 2 of University which really shows this exceptionally well in parts 1 and 2 of the series. Leah has played against the lunatic to his left before and has notes on the opponent. Plus, it quickly becomes apparent that the lunatic on his left is clueless on bet sizing (5x, 8x, 10x), on what hands to play (he is in waaaaay to many hands), and tries to bluff almost every hand. Leah makes it a point to get in as many hands as possible against the lunatic when Leah has hands better than the lunatic’s range. Then Leah calls wider than usual because the lunatic is almost always bluffing. This can be very swingy since once in a while the lunatic has a real hand and will get paid off since no one believes he ever has a hand. But eventually Leah ends up with all of the lunatic’s chips. It’s a high wire act to play against this type of player, but I found it fascinating, and it made me think of the opponents you are describing in this thread.