You played it fine until the turn imo...you can't get value from anything, except AhQh, AhKh, AhJh but those probably double barrel the turn, so villain either has air or an overpair OTT (some random stuff now and then but basically this). You don´t need to make him fold air for obvious reasons and you shouldn't be worried about 2 overcards OTT since this type of hand has only 14% equity and you can get value from them by checking behind the turn and inducing a bluff on a brick river. I would check behind the turn to control the size of the pot and bluff catch on favorable rivers, since villain either has you crushed (equitywise) or the opposite around.

To me it seems loose preflop. Maybe if we were 140bb+ deep i would call the sqz.
I also wouldn't bet the turn.

Agree with pretty much everything Saulo posted. Also, probably not necessary to peel pre at this stack depth vs. a reg with no fish in the pot.

Generally I think there are merits to making AK/AQ fold if our opponent is never going to bluff on blank rivers. In this spot though, I would prefer to check back as you have 6 outs to a nutty hand and won't ever get value from worse. Preflop is fine imo, unless he is a nit.

if i dont know if bet or not i always remeber this :it is only two reason fr bet :value or bluffing...
fuck protection! :D

Preflop might be close. As played I would also xb the turn.

preflop: i call if im better than vilian ,fold if i m worse. easy :D

antihero: this hand is so close.what other option you have for considering calling or folding (ofc ranges).
and dont see problem in folding agains better player and calling agains fish.

"lol solid gameplan" : playing more hand again fish is profitable ,play more tight again better player is profitable too ,than what the fuck?!?

Well I'd rather try to play my default ranges unless I have a good reason to deviate from then. E.g. if villain 3bets super nitty then the weaker flatting hands might become folds etc.

Of course you're right that we can open up a bit more against fish but I still wouldn't make drastic changes to my strategy. With regards to other regs good/bad is often debatable because we usually have only limited samples on them.

Sorry if that sounded rude... just saying that our opponent's perceived competence shouldn't be the most important factor for our decisions... and with limited information it's usually best to stick to our general strategy :)

edit: I agree that JTs is close in this spot so I see your point :)