This is a very interesting hand, both pre and at the river with a crazy board.
Pre, the question: "is the CO or BU extremely aggressive from those positions?" -- this is extremely important. If they are, I think that makes his range
wider, in opposition to what many are saying. I would be happy to trap a lag with 99 from the CO just as I would AA; and I would be more likely to do it with 99 because:
1) if it gets limped around, that's more okay with 99 than AA.
2) 99 is hard to play OOP to a lag, much harder than aces, which makes lowering the SPR helpful.
However, I've just hit a snag in my thoughts. If I limped 99 (planning to raise a lag on the button), and instead a tight guy raised from the BB, I would just call and see a flop IP. No way I'm 3-betting him with 99 or even JJ if he's especially tight from the BB.
Yikes.
It really looks like he has AA here, given our history with the villain.
Okay well, let's move on to the river.
Is this a spot fo
clarkmeister's theorem?? A bizarre thought, but it seriously feels like it. If we shove:
1) he might fold AA; we would play 99 this way.
2) he might make a bad call with JJ/QQ, which check this river back.
3) he might also fold KK (minor point since there's only 1 combo, but it's still a nice victory for us).
So shoving gives him multiple ways to make a mistake. If I make it all the way to the river, this is the line I take. It might salvage some profit from a hand that (imo) was misplayed on the flop and turn.
After this thinking and leveling, I'm probably putting him on AA pre, set mining, and folding the flop when we miss. If someone has an "approximately 0% limping range," then his limp is probably just AA. Even if he only does this with AA 5% of the time, that's still what he has if he does it with other hands 0% of the time. We just ran into the 1 out of 20 times he does this with AA.