I've decided to play a flopped set differently in a raised pot.

here's an example. Tell me what you think.

0.25/0.50 NL, Prima

I have 88 in the SB, an EP raises to 2, the next guy calls him, I call and everyone else has folded.

pot: $6.50

Flop

Now I think almost everyone would play it like this. You will either

A) Check/call the flop, then check raise the turn.
B) Make an overbet on the flop, hoping to get raised, so you can essentially pot-commit the guy.

Instead of playing it the "standard" ways, I decided to throw out an underbet of 2 dollars, trying to feign weakness and induce a raise. Anyone like this approach? On this occasion, he called.

Turn

I checked and he bet 6, into a 12 dollar pot. I'm putting him on something like AJ or AQ so I called.

River

I then bet 8 dollars trying to bet for value. He called then mucked.

Do you think I got extracted the most I could out of him? Tell me what you think of this different approach.

My experience is that if a player underbet the pot, I raise him, and he reraises, then he is very strong. But not all players now this. I sometimes play sets like you did, not with great succes.
I think you should have bet the turn too - a potsize bet if he has a diamond, a jack or a queen. When you check and he bets you should make a big raise, to 20-something.

The problem with this approach is that turn card. If I hold something like AK..that turn card is going to scare the crap out of me. If you had bet bigger on the flop you might have been able to get more money out of him.

But who knows...maybe he was calling with QQ. It's hard to say if you extracted the most as possible. I know I would have checked that turn behind you. But then again I would have raised the flop big as well.

I fail to see how there is much difference between a small bet and a check here, other than with a small bet into a raiser you are actually representing some sort of hand. I guess it helps to have some idea what sort of player this is, but when I call out of position and hit a set, I will usually check. That is a very scary board though, so a pot-sized bet might not be a bad idea there either. If he has a big ace he is most likely coming over the top.

A call of your small bet there is the worst possible outcome in my opinion when that turn card hits, because he is playing it as a draw.

Under the circumstances (I think he had a small ace or small pair) you won about as much money as you can reasonably be expected to win with this hand I think.

I play sets lots of different ways including leading with a small bet.

In this case though, I dont like the small lead. Too many bad things can happen, mainly that if calls and then a guy behind him calls with the flush draw.

In this case I prefer to check, raiser will usually bet, then one of the guys behind him will call if they have the draw, then you put in the big check raise (to get the draws out)

Or you lead the full pot and hope the raiser raises driving out the draws.

I agree with Ice... what if he had a diamond draw (possibly even a straight draw, even though his preflop raise would make that seem odd)... you let him get a cheap card to hit his flush (which luckily didn't happen)... I think you would bet big hoping he has AK or AQ, in which case he'll probably raise you, and you've got him trapped. Or check, he'll bet, and just call and let him bleed himself out.

MVP:

Anybody decent will not raise on the flop with AK when someone leads into them

Even if I check-called, he has to know I have something decent on that flop as well. That's why I posted this "tricky" kind of approach which I dont think people would be used to seeing.