[chumsferd]

[ QUOTE ]
I realize I butchered this hand. I was indecisive and I misplayed it on all streets (except the flop). I wanted to post it to learn from it (and punish myself).

[/ QUOTE ]

That's cool. I hope I'm not coming off too blunt, that's not my intention...

[ QUOTE ]
I just wasn't convinced that he had an ace or a king (turns out he had both). I don't look to bluff a lot at this level. This was just one of those hands that I wasn't ready to throw away on the flop. I called to see what he'd do next.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is hard to justify. This guy raised from UTG (and got cold called) and then he then led out for half pot on a AKx flop. What is about this guys play that says "I have less than 2nd pair." Now, if you had been here for a whole bunch of orbits with him, and you had come to realise that he wasn't positional with his raises and he always leads out for full-pot when he hits, then this would be a fine chance to take a stab at the pot. But you've only been here for one orbit, you can't possibly have that kind of information... you should be reverting to what you believe a typical player will do.

Now, IIRC, a typical-model of a $50NL player would be someone who is no more than marginally positionally aware, who over-values Ax and likes to get to showdown. If you revert to that model of the player, in these kinds of circumstances, until you see enough of them to know better, not believing them on this flop is probably a mistake and expecting to be able to take pots off them is probably also a mistake.

I think you'll make more money by not bluffing at all until you know who can be bluffed. It's not as much fun, but weak-tight is probably close to the optimal strategy in that game. JMO.