looking at it again I am wrong regarding the flop. I must have thought it went bet/fold/call but there were 3 folds as you said here(betting into 4 guy).

So even vs super aggro guy I guess id change what I said to calling is ok. But yeah raise, gii is too hopeful and folding may be better. Super aggro guy rarely checking back turn so not many cards hero can continue without it being a bit of a spewfest.

Interestingly even this kind of player the whole line(inot too surprising but worth noting) makes a big difference the fact he bet into 4 player as opposed to 1. Villain probably isn't a thinking player but he should be weighting heros range to flushes OTT. The queen hearts in heros hand isn't enough id have thought as a blocker. But ye better to have than not.

For me in villains shoes a good continuation bluffing range would be some kinda Ah hand with wheel cards. But he clearly is just betting w/e without much thought. I don't like the turn raise regardless though as the times you get called(it should be fairly high given the action and board) I'm now thinking its just a clear fold and cant justify much else.
When you shove the turn the rare occurances hero is ahead there are too many rivers that change that anyway.

All in all feels needlessly high variance while justifying it basically on a betting tell of an over aggro guy in a micro stake game. Meaning its hard to pick up on betting tells correctly in these conditions.
Sometimes you have to make a stand vs guy like this but you'll get better spots.

So what is your new strategy for 'super aggressive' players?

I find different categories of 'super aggressive' players
- nut peddlers -> when they have (or good chance) of scoop, start potting
- late position stealers -> after flop if everyone checks, start potting
- nice starting hand -> start potting early and keep going
- good high, low not made yet -> start potting after flop, keep going until low


most of the 'super aggressive' players that win, do so by scaring others into folding (even better if they check/call a couple times before folding)


My strategy for playing against them depends on my position, cash or tournament, my hand, how many players still in hand and what I have seen the 'super aggressive' do. I will check/call but in later streets check/fold or check/re-pot more often. I find the best way to fight aggression is with my own aggression.

You will slowly lose your stack if you check/call, check/call, check/call on draws or 2nd/3rd nut one way hands.

Well, it depends. As a rule of thumb, I took
- call more instead of folding
- raise more instead of calling
- getin somewhat lighter
This is because medium hands are stronger against a villain that bets often and strong with a wide range.

I chose the word super-agressive in lack of a better description. From the label alone it's not clear, what I'm meaning. It wasn't even that clear to myself. From the discussion I think "overplaying" and "betting too thin" are more appropriate terms to descripe the specific playstyle.
The player here, does all his bets for value unlike what you'd expect, when coining "super-aggressiveness", where a player also semibluffs and bluffs a lot.

I wouldn't label a player that bets his hand (your example 1) or steals at a normal rate (your example 2) as super-aggressive.

I think, tournament poker is a different kind of beast and haven't really had problems with aggressive players in MTTs all that much. It may take a while, but eventually I find a hand and that's usually the end of it. Also tournament poker tends to be shortstacked after a while, which often reduces the problem to getin/fold flop.