Given how you describe the villian i like the c-raise on the flop, it looks strong. The turn shove is also +ev imo. seems like the type of villain that likes to float alot with a wide range so i guess you would get a lot of folds with a turn shove + many outs if he calls.I like the way you played it, although the turn card didnt change the board much like you say i think you can get a lot of weak pair kings, aces and 7s + QT, JT type hands to fold here.

Your equity on the turn is such that you just need him to fold 3.2% of the time. If he called 100% of the time (and your 8 and 6 weren't outs), you would be losing only 28 chips.

After reading your comment, I went back and read my post, and I thought "OMG WHAT AN IDIOT I AM! DID I REEEEAAALLLY POST THAT???"I posted that earlier today when I was dead tired and shouldn't have been passing on any "knowledge". I remembered that yesterday I crunched some numbers in PokerStove and came up with the fact that you come up only 28 chips short when called.A few minutes ago, I thought this could qualify me for "Idiot of the Year Award", and I started writing a response to that effect.So I crunched number in PokerStove, and I shocked myself by discovering that this statement is close to being correct, given certain assumptions. I'm unable to reproduce needing only 3.4% folds, but here is what I came up with...considering a preflop raising range of 60.5%, If you give Villain a wide, "calling station" range on the flop of any two suied spades, any ace, pocket pairs of 77+, and KT+, then you have 32.3% equity when called. (Notice I left out gutshots...not that many sane people would call those or even some of the other hands in this range.) If this entire range then calls your Turn allin, you are 50 chips short of breaking even. This is equivilent to needing Villain to fold 5.6% of the time. (50/880)Looking at a different range, if you assume that on the flop Villain folds out all kings (except K7o), and A2-A6, your equity still hangs over 32%. So your equity when called with this entire range is 823 chips, which is 57 chips short of breakeven and requires Villain to fold 6.4% of the time. (57/880)Of course the problem is that Villain is likely to reraise allin a certain % of his range. But those hands are not likely to include any hands you have fold equity against on the turn, so they do not affect calculations much.Another problem is that all the remaining hands, if they called your flop raise, have a good chance of calling the turn shove, so you may not even have 6% fold equity.And a third problem (with my calculations) is that I used Villain's entire calling range on the flop to calculate equity when he calls on the turn. Weaker hands will be the first to fold and decrease your equity when called.However, this last effect is not prominent, as in most cases you need to hit your straight or flush to be good.So, yes, needing 6.4% of hands to fold on the turn is significantly higher than needing 3.4% to fold, but still a surprisingly low figure.

I was thinking more about this hand. 32bb deep, I think I'd opt for a fold preflop OOP against an aggro overbetting opponent. You won't hit the flop hard enough often enough to do much but semi-bluff. 86s just doesn't seem strong enough to confidently get your stack in in many situations.If you're opponent has already demonstrated a willingness to easily give up after he cbets, then it's an easier call, but you are probably better off being patient and waiting for some solid broadway cards.I know this is easy to say in hindsight, but I really think it's a better strategy, as this opponent gives more away postflop than preflop and you want a hand you are fairly comfortable with postflop.His overbetting style doesn't give you much in the way of implied odds and really the only way you are going to get value from this hand is semi-bluffing. The question is, does this get you enough value for the risks you take? More often than not, you are giving up completely after the flop.