Re: Too Passive?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Looks fine to me. I doubt that he would be attacking you after you 3-bet the flop and bet the 2nd Q on the turn. He's a bit loose and may just have a weaker Q, but I think he could also have a FH here often enough that I don't really want to raise back.

[/ QUOTE ]

My thoughts exactly.

Re: Too Passive?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'd say 3-bet the turn. The fact that he checkraised the flop and faced the field with 2-bets makes me think he doesn't have a set or QJ. I'd expect this from a queen and chances are it's weaker than yours (he raises AQ for sure, and with 13% PFR he probably raises KQ). However, this is assuming he isn't a complete moron and would notice what a checkraise would do on the flop. His numbers aren't that bad, so I'm assuming he is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not raising here was a result of tilt. I'm not normally prone to this. Everything me screemed reraise, and I refused due to the way I've been running lately.

Re: Too Passive?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know about that. If he's wise enough to smoothcall the flop and checkraise the turn with a monster, I think he's smart enough not to face everyone with two cold with that same monster.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think recognizing an opportunity to c/r comes before recognizing the difference between a c/r to protect and a c/r to trap the field for value.