Live $1/$2 NL, full table. Like many LLSNL tables, it immediately seems passive enough that I can open up lighter in position.

Hero (~$280): image might be that I like action, given that my first hand, I raised to $10 with AJ from UTG+1, called by MP (standard passive guy, stack $85), fast forward to postflop, J 8 5 K, flop I 2/3 PSB (he calls), turn I shove, he calls, wins with KJ, I rebuy saying "that was fast!"
V1 (covers by ~$100): OMC, usual passive-appearing rec, 70s Caucasian.

Limps from UTG, V1 (UTG+2), and MP. Folded to Hero in CO, who raises to $15 with Q6. Calls from Btn (unknown, stack $125), UTG (unknown, stack ~$200), V1, and MP (fishy/stationy older guy, stack ~$400).

Flop (~$75): J 6 5
UTG, V1, and MP check. Hero bets $60. Btn and UTG fold. V1 calls kinda quickly and carefully. MP folds.

Turn (~$195): 8. V checks.
Board texture seems similar, therefore I'm convinced whatever I would bet on the turn, he would call with his range. I'm ok with seeing a free card.
Hero checks.

River: 3
V1 bets $60 confidently.

Hero? Are we content with call to showdown? Are we raising for light value? Can we r/f here, or if we raise, should it just be r/c line?

uh??? this is fist pump shove. Calling is burning money on fire and don't put yourself in a r/f situation. For OMC has AXdd and KXdd but very few of the KXdd combos given that Jd is here. So he basically has AXdd and all the other dd like 9T, 89, 87, 76. And then add all straights, 88 and so on. And he plays every one of these draws slow coz he is OMC and wont fold nothing.

Don't even put yourself in r/f situation. just shove.

Pretty easy shove. He's calling with worse. By my math V only has to call $145 more. No need to raise less than the max.

+1 on easy shove. Also based on the two hands ITT I'd reconsider whether playing super laggy is a profitable strategy. One looks like a bad bluff (value bet??), and this is an easy value spot that you're missing out on.

I check the flop. We're against four opponents and I think it's rare that a bet gets the pot either heads-up or takes it down. We're rarely a big favorite vs. the types of hand that call a flop bet most of the time you're 50/50 going into the turn.

If you're going to bet the flop, I think you have to be comfortable with barreling the turn in a general sense. The value of your hand is that you can rep things like overpairs/JJ/AJx and you're able to try and bluff out a "scared" one-pair hand all while having 50% equity. One thing of note though, stacks are unique in this hand in that you're basically having slightly over a pot sized bet left on the turn (205ish / 195ish) - I feel you would go all-in on the turn with your strong hands. So it might be wise to play a hand like this in that manner too.

Having said that, the 8s is an awful turn card and it isn't because the board texture didn't change (as you stated) I'd argue that it did change significantly. The eight is a bad card because a lot of hands your opponent has may have improved. Their draws may have paired up, they may have hit a set or a funky two pair, and some pockets pairs now have draws. You are correct though, I think you have diminishing fold equity on this turn card.

As played on the river, you're looking at $60 into the pot which is now $255. Effective stacks are $205 ($145 is a max raise to put you all-in). I agree with the other posters and I would also go all-in on the river. You'd be giving your opponent 3:1 and they likely will look you up with enough worse hands than yours.

PF is fine if you have good reads and are deeply rolled, but given that there are unknowns at this table this isn't true. So it's spew. But at least it's aggressive spew.
Flop looks good.
Turn should be a double barrel.
As played OTR I'm ok with a flat or min-raise, with the min-raise/F being the most +EV line.

Edit: never mind, you're too short to min-raise/F. I just flat here, but a solid argument for shoving can be made.

jam the turn, jam the river

pre - i'd like to have some clue as to how likely a raise is to TID.... otherwise its just button clicking?

jam turn

I think what froze me on the river was the quickness/confidence of V's lead into that 3rd diamond. Reading my hand in an online forum is easy to say "shove", but at the table, the bet did not smell defensive, it smelt nutted. Hence OP.

For me to learn from this spot, I guess I need to identify the line between "easy shove" and something that's an actual decision. Hypothetically, let's keep all variables the same (LAG approach to table in position, etc), except let's change the preflop hand selection. Is your river decision also "easy shove" with T9? What about 87?

Several of you are saying to jam the turn here, which of course eliminates the river decision altogether. But what's your reasoning? Do you think you have fold equity here? Or do you actually think you're ahead? Or are you trying to rep an overpair/balance your range? If the turn was something like an A or K, I believe my decision would be to shove, as I'd perceive my FE increased. Or a turn of Q or 6 is an easy shove. But a turn card of 8, from my POV, means whatever he called on the flop, he's calling the turn also. Unless he has precisely something like T9, it seems to me the rest of his calling range is ahead, hence my decision to see a free river card.

With Q6 dd and 109 dd the turn is the card to shove. You apply maximum fold equity and if you are called you have lots of outs vs all sorts of hands. I don't see any reason to slow down. When we open with suited junk and hit the board this hard we need to apply pressure. It is great for your image when it gets to showdown.

Preflop seems pretty awful to me at a loose passive table. Not sure why no one has stated this. I've seen a lot of this lately. To open your range post flop does not mean raise any suited garbage that comes your way over 3 limpers. If they're loose passive they'll be calling your PFR a lot and cbet tin into 8 people with not much seems ungood.

If indeed the table was all or mostly loose-passive, then I would 100% agree with you. But this table, at least when I sat down, was probably 50% tight-passive (limp-folded to raises $10 or greater), 30% loose-passive (limp-calling $7-$10, sometimes calling/sometimes folding to raises >$10), then me. Your statement seems a little extreme in the context of my specific table, therefore I partially disagree. But in the general sense, yes you are right.

As expected, this showdown with Q6, combined with two young TAG/LAG-ish guys who sat down ~30 minutes later, loosened the table up quite a bit, so tightening my ranges was the obvious adjustment to make.

Are we shoving river with T8dd?

I lean to calling here against a 70 year old.

I'm probably shoving with the ten high flush and calling with the 8 high. But I'll admit that's based on intuition, and I haven't actually run ranges for this spot.

Couple things I would think about in this spot:

a) Are we really sure that OMC calls a shove with 100% of his betting range? Even if we have a loose image, when we shove immediately after a draw hits it may not be that hard for him to release two pair or a set. Combo wise, how much of his b/c range beats us compared to the hands we beat?
b) What sort of diamond combos do we really think he is limp/calling $15 with from UTG+1? I don't see a ton of OMCs doing this with 54s or even 87s. Remember, a lot of OMCs can do this with AKs because "it's only a drawing hand."

I don't think this is so obvious vs a typical OMC. Against a laggy kid, sure, they will be blocking bet all kinds of worse hands and with those odds will sometimes call without a flush. The typical OMC? Not so much.

The bet sizing looks like a blocking bet, but how much worse will he call a raise? Is this ever a suck bet or a badly sized value bet with the nuts? What does he limp/call in EP? For a lot of OMCs, JX and flush draws are the only thing they have in their range after the flop, sets raise and everything else folds on flop or preflop. There are OMCs that I'm not raising here because they will not call with worse once the flush comes in. Heck, there are even a couple of 1/2 OMC passive/chasers who I could fold this too some of the time because they always have a flush here and it's usually ace high. With no other read except villain is an OMC, I'm torn between shoving and just flatting here. It would really depend on my read at the table.

yea only read you said basically is omc. You provide some hand history but is that is not vs this villain is it? probably a shove over, but some omc's they only have ax suited here and your dead. If he is bet folding straights/sets then it starts to become borderline. I seriously don't mind a clickback here, think you will get more crying calls from the lattermentioned hands vs a shove.

Then which ones were limping, the right ones or the loose ones? 3 limpers, btn, and blinds is a lot of people to hack through with a raise when really you'd rather not have callers. I don't think this is good enough in the cut off.

Collectively, everyone's feedback is quite helpful; thank you.

I still have more to learn about this spot. I'd like to direct focus to the preflop hand selection. So what we know (with probably 90% confidence is that the table is 50% tight-passive and 30% loose-passive. We observe the table for a couple of orbits and decide that creating a LAG image in position could be profitable. We decide that our in-game adjustment is to raise wider from HJ, CO and/or Btn.

The raise to $15 from CO has been criticized (fair enough), yet no one has commented on what opening range he or she feels is an acceptable alternative, given this table dynamic. I'd be curious to hear what your raising ranges are here. Phrased another way: if we're calling Q6 "suited junk", what minimum kicker is "not junk" for this style of play? Q9? QT? Are you never raising Q-high-suited in this spot?

Q9 and QT are way way way better to raise in this spot. There are straight draw opportunities, and it's much more likely that if you pair your ten that you'll be good than if you pair your six.

You're thinking along the right lines. I'm a little confused by your percentages though. What happened to the other 20% of the table?

What you want to get to is a point where you don't have a static range. Depending on who is limping and what position you're in, stack sizes, and players left to act, your range should be all over the scale. If there's a bunch of limpers to me in the cutoff then I'm more apt to limp behind since hitting the Q flush in a limped pot is a better situation than hitting one in a raised pot. If there are fewer limpers and they are the fit or fold post flop types, then I'm more inclined to raise it. Vs. a bunch of loose passive limps in the CO I probably just let it go.

Also, I'm not really looking to "create" any kind of image. If a certain play is profitable in a situation then great. I could care less what kind of image it creates until someone starts adjusting to it. I'll keep my image in mind as I'm making decisions, but it's not my goal when doing anything at the table. I just look for "spots" however they come and exploit.