This is a great hand to post….I personally am trying to find a way to get this in pre, or setting up a go and go.  You have a little to big of stack to obv squeeze shove, so I would probably squeeze a full 4 x raise basically saying you aren't folding and calling a shove.  I think that this folds out any weak hands including sb whose range is extremely wide and you pick up a good pot.  No matter what comes on the flop, I am sizing the raise pre to where I am shoving flop. 

With the way you played the hand, you flopped tpgk, I am leading flop and evaluating, but would be hard to find a fold.  I think you checked to set up a c/r.  When the villain min raised the turn, he is finding out either where he is, or he is inducing.  IMO, most villains at this level, a min raise=nuts and they are tyring to extract value.  However, going back to my initial comment I think I am not even getting to this spot.

Again, I think that this is a great hand to discuss so I am looking foward the other member's responses.  Best of luck at the tables!

The type of opponent (16/9 tho small sample) does not strike me as being very fit to induce against, as I would appreciate the line of play defenitely more vs a spewtard.

Here vs this kind of opponent the line of play seems to be rather passive (intendedly..?) and will often induce airball bets at some point. By not 3betting pre, I fail to establish 2 facts: apparently A. I have a (very) good hand and B. Villain needs to respons,thereby defining HIS hand more too.

By checking the flop I fail to gather information again. Here i'd like a donkbet putting him to the test.

Your line of play seemed to be aimed at c/r flop indeed or else at rope a doping (letting him bluff several streets), but after the check behind, a propable blanc might induce a missed hand to minraise steal, as he might not believe that the 3 helped you in any way, as you did not show strength before.

After reaching this point (which I dont like at all) I think i am gonna call the turn minraise and probably check/call the river too.

If my line of play is aimed at inducing bluffs or bets from marginal holdings , I need to go for it, if I reached my goal and it actually seems to be happening.

So either I play my hand strong by 3b pre and taking the lead on the flop, re eavaluating if I get 3b there, OR I play it seemingly weak at 1st streets to induce, BUT following up on that line if he complies and bets.

As a sidepoint: I agree on villain having a monster often at 3b -ing the turn but this is more valid in cases where hero 3b pre, cbet flop cbet turn and gets raised….. here I do not know…

Here the line of play leads me to often go for a good hand and rarely folding. I realise that this is risky but trying to induce IS a very risky play too, as you have little to no info about your opponents hand following this line. This is why I would play this line hardly ever vs a 16/9 but would be willing to (and sometimes do) if villain was a spewy betting machine..

Interesting line of play, but as stated generally i would not like a fold on the turn and i don't neccesarily read a lot of strength at his minraise.

So you can follow through on this inducing hand and never fold..    

If you realised though that this kind of opponent often DOES have a good hand, a fold could be better in this case.

I would advise not to play this line unless you want to follow through, but a call might still be good.

In the end, this is a real tough situation every which way and aborting might still be best after all.

Thx for the good responses on the hand. def helped to adjust and question my in game decision.
Btw as played I folded the hand on turn. That raise looked suspicous, and I had a solid reshove stack left.