by bet tiny, i mean bet tiny. I'd happily make it $5-$10 here on river. I think betting $20 is akin to betting $30 or $40 etc and won't change his actions too much. I expect him to call with worse fairly often and also to raise junk enough of the time to make it more +ev than checking back even when he does take a c/r line for value (because it should be next to never without history as said since it makes zero sense, so we have to treat this hand in a vacuum to all intensive purposes).

by betting around 1/5 pot u only need him to call with worse a very small %.

But im checking this back, i dont like to re-open the betting by making a small bet. If he shoves over our small bet we pretty much have to fold.

Seems like a check back against a good player. If you bet you're just going to get owned, he doesn't have worse Q in his range and your hand is very face up as Qx or better when you bet.

No it's still >50%

why 50%?

That's the definition of a value bet. You need >50% against oppo calling range, it doesn't matter how much you bet or at what freq you get called.

Even if you bet 0.01$, it has to be >50% equity against his calling range to qualify as a value bet.

Anyway I like a tiny bet and if villain does ch/r it sucks but I think I'm gonna call just because its super unlikely he would do this. Making it very likely that ch/r would be a reaction to your sizing.

otherwise he wins the extra bet more often than he loses it, meaning you lose the extra bet more often than you win it.

Think i prefer betting really small($5-15) over checking back, and then calling shove if he does, just becuase his line does look FOS, but obv not feeling great about it.

What do you think how often this guy calls 33/99 out of the BB, I think both of those should be discounted.
About the hand: imo chk>shove, I don't like the idea of betting tiny either, he will have a nuts-type hand more then 0%, but I don't see him calling w a worse hand ever, and if he shoves, he would need to bluff a lot for bet 5-10$/call to be better than check behind.
Edit: he needs 50% air when he never calls and c/s for betting tiny to be better then checking back.

I just think about my own SB/BB flatting range vs wide BTN steal. AQ,KQ, or QJ, I'd flat like 50% because I expect those hands to dominate the wide range. Rest of the time, I'm 3betting those hands for value. QT and below are in my 3bet/bluffing or folding range. Let's say he flats wider than I do so that would be something like +Q9, if that's the case then we are in trouble because now we have to worry about Q9 as well as QJ,QK, or AQ.

He CR the flop and bomb the turn and you called both bets, so I think your hand looks quite strong, probably Qx for sure. So I think if you bet the river, chances are more than 50% that you will be CRAI or will be called by better hands. Better hands being QJ or QK. CRAI being 99, 33, Q9, or AQ. And he will fold all his bluffs and pretty much all the worse hands.

Just speaking from experience, I used to always VB like 1/2 pot on river and most of the time but when I was called, my hand was beat by something like QJ vs my QT. Him donking the flop and the turn and me raising on the turn just because I hit my trips is another good example, the villain then checks a brick river and I VB like 3/5 pot and he snaps with AQ while I'm holding QJ.

I then realize later that I was actually value betting thin given the circumstance and the action on flop and turn. Those examples are not just coolers since I'm talking over a huge sample of hands. My excuse for playing trips no kicker this way was always "VB here is always +EV, VB here is always +EV" but all the results just slapped me in the face saying "No!! It's not +EV!!"

VB small is an interesting concept and I have tried that line before also but I was tank CRAI so many times that I have to wonder if my small VB encouraged a bluff or allowed the villains to sniff out my trips no kicker to a degree that allow them to value CRAI thin. And obviously when I did look them up they pretty much never were bluffing but they had hands that out kicked mine by a hair. I think those are the hardest domination to forget imo.

So I read some of the insightful comments but I can't quite agree with any one of them except that I would still check river.

Ok lots of people here seem to think that we'd bet $5 then fold to a shove. Since this hand is much more in a vacuum, I would bet tiny/call more often than i would bet tiny/fold. What % i would do of each i'm not 100% sure yet, but i feel he's far more likely to spaz the first time when seeing this line. And again, he should have a tiny range for c/r river for value so he doesn't actually need to raise with many bluffs to make it a call (that is if we're correct that he should just be shoving his FH's AQ and maybe KQ on river).

If I was betting $20-$40 like others have suggested i think i bet/fold. since with stack sizes as they are, his bluffing and range will likely just narrow too much.

i would always bet like $3-7 OTR and call a shove. You would be surprised at how bad regs spazz out when you do something fishy looking.

I think he spazzes alot here and such a small part of his value range (perhaps none) ever c/r this river that i think he could put us on something like 1010 here often enough and try to spazz out and get us to fold or simply call with a hand like A9

right thanks

Surely the only reason to bet small is to induce and therefore call a raise?

His range here is like 95%+ air, the rest nuts. I mean, I expect him to have something with (in his mind) marginal SDV that he can c/c very, very rarely.

Why would villain check the river here with a boat when most regs at this stake would never fold trips in this spot? I don't know if he thinks you're super-awesome pokerman or whatever (and can fold trips), but river seems like a terrible check w a boat when there is only one possible draw to bluff with.