$1/$2 Live - Bottom set on flop and facing 3bet

Question

I play weekly at my casino and at $1/$2 they have buy-in of $60 min-$200 max. This is one of my hand I played last week and I am interested in seeing how you would play this hand when you have a top set on the flop and facing 3-bet on a straight-board.

The villain in this hand is a a hyper-aggressive player who is down 600 (3 buy-ins) and playing with his 4th buy-in. But, after his first two buy-ins he is playing little tight and aggressive when he plays.

$1/$2 Full Ring - Holdem - 9 players (currently 6 seated)

Villain (middle) - $420
Hero (BB) - $460

Hero has 7⋄7♣

Villain calls from middle - folds back to SB who raises to 10. Hero calls from BB and villain calls.

Flop comes : J♣7♥8♠

SB checks, Hero checks, Villain bets 15, SB calls.

Villain has be known to be aggressive and takes control of pot from flop.

Hero raises to 45.

Villain re-raises (3bets) to 145. SB folds.

What should Hero do?

I will post the results after checking your reviews. But, from what I saw this villain does not raise too much over 100. He bets 50 or raises 50 but this is a huge re-raise.

Did he flop it or is he taking control of my tight-passive image?

Answer 1

If you think you have the best hand then going all-in is about the only move that's left as a sensible option.

That said, for us to be ahead, villain would have to have J7x, J8x, 87x (Two pairs); J9x, T8x, T9x, T7x (Pair+Gutshots); 96x, 65x (Open Ended Straight Draws); AJx (TPTK, although I doubt he'd be this aggressive?!).

Otherwise, we're behind JJ, 88, T9x.

If you perceive the villain to be loose and still very aggressive, then I'd move AI, with the assumption that he's playing a high percentage of the hands we beat this way. If he's slightly tighter now, as you say, then I think it's a much closer decision. Either way, the villain is repping that he has decent equity.

Personally, as it is, it seem like a fold. If you're behind, which I think is very likely, then you have few redraws as they're compromised by his better sets.

Answer 2

First of all this is not a huge raise. I'm assuming the SB didn't contribute money postflop.
I wouldn't be too worried about a higher set because it's too unlikely to really worry about it, but it is obviously part of his range.
The read said that he was a hyper-aggressive player, and without other information we have to include bluffs in his range here.
We are facing a $100 bet with 30+45+145=220 in the pot. I don't really think we can fold with these odds, so the options are calling or raising with the only reasonable raise size being all in. If we call he will obviously go all in with all the hands that aren't bluffs and with some hands that are. So the implied odds give us the call here, although we might have to fold to a shove on the turn since we can be fairly sure that we're behind with 10 outs at that point.
I think a shove is the only reasonable option here. I really don't think this is a fold against a lot of people especially at 1/2 live.

Answer 3

Once the SB chooses not to cbet you should certainly be leading here OTF. You're giving him a chance to draw out on you with way too many pair+gutshot hands and this board is fairly coordinated so you should be getting at least one call reasonably often.

Once you check the flop, it's pretty close between calling or raising, but I think raising is slightly better. Either way, I think betting flop in the first place is way better than either of those options.

Once he 3bets we're pretty much screwed and I doubt we can call profitably, so fold. This is just another argument for why the c/r is meh in the first place. Also note that we can definitely bet/call this flop, but can't check/raise/call due to stack sizes.