Here's the crux: I had just finished going over my database for the month so far. I'm playing micros, a mix of 4nl and 10nl (oddly doing way better at 10nl) and I think the biggest leak I found is that I'm over-valuing bigger broadways and I'm getting absolutely killed taking TPTK or TPGK to showdown. Guys are always showing up with trips they never raise and bizarre 2 pr combos they should never have in a 3bet pot, like 27 and the like. I'm losing a lot w/ AK on A high dry boards, which seems ridiculous, but there it is.

So my read on myself is - don't get carried away, in general, over-repping one pair hands. I'm winning a little with these hands, but not enough. Probably because I'm losing too much when villains show great interest in the pot. Thoughts on this in general for the micros?

But now this read on myself comes into conflict with very recent reads on this particular villain. He's trying to overbet protection (in two instances, at least) with made, but extremely vulnerable hands, and definitely not the current nuts. Or at least he has. But I've just spent an hour proving to myself that I have to be cautious in these situations with my actual hand. Plus, maybe he knows I've seen him doing that, and now he's aping that behavior with a stronger hand, hoping that I'll look him up. 

What do people do when you're trying to teach yourself the game, and you go into a session with a clear strategy adjustment, and basically right off the bat you're presented with a situation that you think might be the exception to the rule you've set for yourself? Do we go with the in-game read? Or take the longer-term view (that we're demonstrably getting killed in these spots over a large sample) and err on the side of how we want to play in general? 

I'm interested in thoughts on the hand and thoughts on the quandary. Do your worst!