Won the hand lost 2 bets?

[MRBAA]

Five handed live 4-8 game. Two limps, one fold, SB completes and I have TT in BB. I check, giving up some pot equity here for deception. It was a fast-played, aggressive game with decent players and I felt it was worth the investment here. Flop comes 664 with a two flush. I bet, first limper folds, second limper raises (he's been playing very loose aggressive, overadjusting to the short table), SB folds, I three-bet, limper 2 flashes K4 and folds.

I was pretty sure my hand was good here, although there's some chance he could have a 6, since he's been playing a wide range of hands. But I don't think he'd have raised a 6 here.

I also thought there was a good chance he'd fold to my three-bet unless he had a flush draw (a slow played overpair was very unlikely for this player). Was I right to three bet to charge the flush draw and force a fold with the hand he in fact had -- bottom pair plus overcard? Would it have been better to wait for turn and bet out a non-flush card? What if my pair was kings -- would waiting for the turn and going for a checkraise be better?

[sthief09]

I don't think it's possible for deception to make up for the equity you lose preflop against people who are playing K4. also, a lot of people won't raise TT here, so you aren't even gaining anything in deception. I think your choice to not raise preflop is pretty terrible.

I think postflop is fine. with AA or KK, I might stop n go to keep him in the pot. with TT, I wouldn't mind picking up the pot on the flop since he probably has 3-6 outs. check-raising the turn no matter what comes wouldn't be a bad idea either

[MRBAA]

Key here is it was five handed, had been for an hour and was likely to stay short for awhile. Deception and changing up play had a lot of value here, since one often must over-represent hands it's very good to occaisonally under-represent. The problem with waiting for the turn was he might take a free card if he had a flush draw.