So much this

Yeah, you're right desp! I just had a shower and it came to me.
'Don't fold pre if you are ok post' is what I should have said

raise less on flop, bet turn

pres fine, 3betting is fine too..think flop is a really good spot to lead...as played continue betting on the turn, and just call river obv

Dont like how you played this at all. Could 3 bet or call, 3 bet might be better out of position. Bet flop def dont check. On river just call, he showing a ton of strength and cant see what raising does hes not going to call unless he has you beat.

one more in the ssync camp. This might be best but I also like desperado's line (c/c flop, lead t/r) and that's probably what I'd do.

Yeah river is bad. That why I posted this hand I did that cause I thought he was confident and out of the line or had a pair or the K and will continue betting for me. Why ? Because his stats 20/13 and the way he plays indicate a good player and I was counting on the fact he knew I knew and that the chance of me having the Q was slim. Reviewing the hand, obviously I wouldn't play the same way, it was kind of a try of a big read and I should have keep it simple and at least fold on the turn

PS : What RO ? And RIO is ROI ? right (return on investment)

pre is good obv, i'd call > fold > 3b as default with broadways

+1 to lead or c/c flop

or top pair weak(er) kicker/ 2 pair vs straight etc.

FWIW I really do not like 3 betting this hand here...I think it is a waste of a hand that flops well...I'd rather keep more chips behind for post flop moves and be able to cheaply get away from truly bad flops.

3 bet worse hands with blockers...playing OOP is never fun but don't completely take it out of your arsenal

SS, you really don't want to take a flop with this hand vs the hands that 4 bet pre anyway. I don't think it's a waste at all. I think QTs plays better in 3 bet pots with the initiative than oop in a raised pot without the initiative.

RO = Results Oriented
RIO = Reverse Implied Odds (Basically more likely to lose a big pot than win a big pot)

We may have to disagree here...in my younger days I was more 3 bet happy...as I get older and more comfortable in y hand reading ability I enjoy widening my flatting range and making thin decisions or plays.

Of course we don't want to take this hand in a 4 bet pot. I also don't want to fold. So why again am I 3 betting? I really don't buy the ole initiative reasoning. Play a small pot til we see three and then manipulate the pot based on how much you like the three you see...

so let's give villain a 4bet range of JJ+/AQs in this spot, which I think is reasonable for an average, non-fish villain, assuming we haven't been 3betting a lot.

vs those hands it's ok not to see a flop. our EV is really bad when we take flops vs these hands. like if we flop top pair of T we will lose big pots to JJ+ if we flop top pair Q we will lose big pots to QQ+/AQ and will be pot controlled by JJ. if we flop 2 pair we might win big pots vs AQ but often we will be pot controlled if we c/r flop and will definitely lose big pots to AK/TT-QQ on TJQ flops. It's just not going to work out well for us when you run all flop combinations in your mind. if we 3bet and get villain to fold alot of his Ax range pf that's good and otf in 3bet pot our rio will be less since SPR will lower and both of us will be stacking off with weaker ranges.

flatting is fine if you know how to proceed post I just think that the argument that it sucks to have to fold to a 4b is valid here. with a hand like 88 on the other hand it's very different as we're not going to lose big pots vs his 4bet range very often but will win big pots vs it. so that's a hand I would hate to 3b then have to fold.

What would you do with 88 exactly . I mean if i use the same range as you for villain , which his a fairly good player, you are WB with JJ+ and against AJ+ only 45/55 or 50/50 if it's suited