Too Agressive with KQs from BB?

[Redhot_man]

Party NL $100
UTG, EP, MP, LP limp, SB folds, I check.
K /images/graemlins/diamond.gif Q /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

FLOP K /images/graemlins/heart.gif T /images/graemlins/heart.gif 5 /images/graemlins/club.gif

I bet $10 and only LP calls

TURN 6 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

I bet $40 to put him all-in, He calls with AK.

I knew that I had to bet to prevent a drawing hand, and that if he raised I would be commited, so I decided to just put him all-in. Opinions?

[Richie Rich]

What kind of player is LP? Sounds like weak-tightie to me. With such a short stack, he would be HOPING TO GOD that he could limp in with AK, catch an A or K on the flop, and have someone go all-in on him with an A or K and weaker kicker. His wish was granted and he doubled-up.

In this case, I would've bet $6 or $8 on the flop go gauge the strength of your opponents' hands. If you get called, and there aren't any obvious draws, then it's time to be a little more cautious on the next two cards. Unless we went all-in first, though, I still would've bet/called him down to the river (assuming he's Tighty McWhitey as mentioned before...if he was a LAG, then I would've put him all-in on the turn as well)

[tewall]

It depends on the player. How likely is he to call you with a draw? Or some other hand that you beat? If very, fine. If not, checking may be better.

If you check, and he's a passive player, if he takes the free card, you know where you stand and may be able to milk a little bit more on the river. What you're really hoping for, however, is that he'll bet with a hand that yours beats.

What you gain by checking are bets made by hands that you have beat that would have folded to you had you bet. The down side, of course, is giving a potential free card.

If your opponent is likely to call with a worse hand, you get the best of both worlds by betting. Otherwise, a check may be in order. Against certain passive-rock types that won't bet without the nuts, a check-fold could be in order.