Cool! We're getting close here (my results here actually bothered me pretty bad!).

Part of the problem here is the smallish flop bet (the significance of which is very worthy of analysis). Since it's now 2 pages, I'm going from memory on this one: We had a raise to $90, then a bet of $150 into a pot of $280, right?

Ok, first, to all of the very good players involved in this thread, do any of you lay down AK if I raise $700 at you? I can tell you my hand range: I don't have AA because I would have re-raised. I have a set (including KK) or else AK. I can't remember the details of this board, but if a suited connector yields a nut straight draw on it, I could also have that. I honestly don't think very many (if any) of the players I play against at the moment will lay down AK here (yet), but given that hand range, I'm pretty sure it's a good laydown (AA can probably call, although borderline, since there are a fair number of hands that AA beats).

But let's assume AK always calls the $700. So, we have a pot of $1,650 or so on the turn with $1,000 available stack depth. AK checks. I bet half of remaining stack depth on the turn: $500. Well, AK is very tempted to make a mistake here, because that bet actually DOES mean I have a set (at least assuming I play this hand "mistake-free" on my own personal view--I'd check the turn on AK and call only a small bet on the river, barring a particular read).

I'd say that if AK (or AA) calls my turn bet, then those hands are stacked. They can't lay down to the last $500 on the river (which in fact makes a turn bet of $400-ish at least interesting). I also think something like 90% of players will get stacked here holding AA, so my figures are perhaps a little pessimistic on that holding, but I don't know about AK.

I'll just conclude for the moment that calling the PF raise with TT on this particular board is a good call only against players who are inclined to overplay their big pairs (or improved AK). That's where the real money is coming from.