I Should Have Played It Differently

In this NL cash game I made 3 straights in the first hour, and another straight for 4 straights within two hours. I swear this is true, on the second straight in the first 30 minutes I said to myself "I'm gonna get stomped by someone else who makes a straight against me when I also have a big hand later tonight." Here's my sad story and how I should have played differently.

I get to limp in the SB with 6-8 off with four players to the flop. Flop is 5-6-8 off and I come out betting. I get min raised by the BB, all others fold back to me and I call. An ace on the turn, board has four suits. I know the player in the BB pretty well, so I check, he bets the pot, and I think for 5 minutes. I go all-in (there is $120 in the pot, I have $180 behind and BB has another $61). He shows 4-7 for a flopped straight and the river doesn't get me a boat.

On the turn, I eliminate the nuts (7-9) and any over pairs, as I didn't think the BB would bet the nuts on this turn so aggressively, and would have raised any significant over-pairs pre-flop. BB could easily have just a 7, like A-7 (he has top pair on the turn with an open-ended) but I also eliminate that type of hand as I thought he would have bet something more like half to two-thirds of the pot. So I put him on the 4-7 or a 5-5 (for a set) - both hands which beat me - or something like a 5-7 (for a pair and an open-ender). I didn't eliminate the 5-5 completely, the betting pattern was certainly indicative of that type of hand as well, but the math says that the 4-7 is actually more likely (I think it's about 3x more likely to have the 4-7 than the 5-5, maybe 6.4% to 2.4%). But the thing is I also thought he could have been playing a smaller two-pair (like 5-6). I was a little stumped when the ace on the turn came out and he bet the pot ($60) - stumped in the sense that I didn't think that board would fear anything for someone with a 4-7 (the odds that I have a 7-9 for the nuts given that he knows he has the 4-7 is about 4.8%). Based on the pot size and his chip stack (lower than mine), I ignored my instincts about the 4-7 and went all-in. I thought it was a "fold or all-in" type of scenario and chose the latter sadly.

I hate when I don't follow my instincts and deductions (and the fact that I told myself I would lose a big pot in this exact way earlier in the night), but I think I could have played the hand differently (other than folding outright after the $60 bet on the turn). In one scenario, I could have re-raised my opponent's min-raise on the flop. One reason why I don't necessarily like that play is if I am re-raised, the same thinking applies - he could have a set or the 4-7 in that spot too, as easily as a lower two-pair or something like the 5-7. Instead, I like the play where on the turn, I come out betting. There was about $60 in the pot at that point, I could have bet anything, like maybe $25 or $30 to gauge where I am. At that point: a) My opponent raises me again, and he would likely raise to say $75 if he had the 4-7 or 5-5, or he may even go all-in at that point (since $75 would be more than half of his stack anyway). Then I have an easy fold. In this case I end up losing about $50. Or, b) He could simply smooth call, putting me on any other hand that is obviously weaker than his, hoping to get another bet out of me on the river assuming no scare cards (like the board pairing) come on the river. Let's say he smooth calls a $30 bet from me so now there is $120 in the pot (and I have $50 committed). On the river, my opponent has $91 left, so I could bet another $30 (I don't think checking is the right thing, even though you suspect you may be beat by a monster), and if he goes all-in, I have an easy fold. If he just calls (for some reason afraid that I have the stone cold nuts - a higher straight), I end up losing $80 total in this scenario - less than the $140 I really lost.

What do you think?