Originally Posted by WVHillbilly
So why are we betting the flop again? We can't fold any King and we're not "afraid" of many turn cards so the only real reason to bet the flop is if we think villain peels with a large portion of his range.
If that's the case I think we should usually be betting the river as well (maybe not this river but most). Cbetting as some sort of range balancing makes no sense to me and betting because we always cbet this type of flop is not a good reason to bet.
The fact that he will peel with lots of hands including pp's, make the bet for value.
I think to help with analysing with this type of hand I should give stats on the villain (though the hand represented a more general spot).
He was a fairly loose kinda passive calling station, 36/22/1.6 with 5.3% 3-bet over 202 hands. Folded to c-bets 33% of the time on 12 occasions.
I think the way I played it was ok though a bet on the river could have been correct to get value from his PP's depending on how big a part of his range they are. I just had the feeling he had a bad K that he wasn't folding. And if he would fold something like that I'd need to bet 3-streets which a K might call but his PP's won't and his floats would just always fold.