I would go ahead and 4bet pre. You end up with SPR of around 2 which works pretty well with aces. As played I lean towards the flop check raise, as I expect a lot of "laggy regs" to bet too wide here.

would 4bet to, even if you are ~240bb deep, spr around 2 should be fine with your hand!As played i would definetly try to c/r this flop, no real reason to lead for me.

Since the post I think leading is the best option. This board wont be stabbed that often and hands that are betting are calling a bet. I would have 4 bet this hand if I played it again it flops well enough and spr is favorable.

Major argument for CR vs leading is that this board doesnt hit aces very hard. I think the concept was mixed up that when 3betting or 4betting in a pot with a higher spr this hand makes a good CR since it is a bad board for aces. In this hand the flop hits the callers range harder and should be lead when flopping equity like overpair+nfd. The only benefit from checking is that possibly a weaker fd will stab but those hands are probably calling a bet if lead into.

I like leading and don't mind not 4betting. spr of 2 is when it starts to lean in favor of the calling. By calling you have much increased chance of keeping the fish in the pot which I suspect makes up for a bunch of EV.
I think this flop is gonna be used to pot control often by the 3better and I'm not expecting the fish to lead much. I expect both to call with most of what they would be betting and raise with most of what they would call a checkraise with. So what's gonna make the difference imo are the times that you loose value when the 3better pot controls.

I agree with David. Preflop is fine as played, and I'd lead on flop. This is a flop where I expect most 3bettors to check back reasonably often, and that's disasterous for our actual hand.

I'm actually not quite sure if we have a good reason to have a x/r range here, unless the 3bettor cbets very frequently.