I would bet the flop against players with these descriptions. They are going to play straightforward and only raise with 2 pair+ and JTss or 8xss and might not even raise those.

On the turn I would bet bigger, like around 40.

River looks like a 100 bet with their descriptions that they can't fold top pair.

I don't like the flop check. I don't like the turn check. And as played I would have definitely bet for thin value on the river hoping that Q hit him.

Pre is totally standard and I agree that we shouldn't even debate that.

Flop- of course c/f seems super weak with KK here but I agree it should be our default play. I might go b/f 5-10% of the time max. If less players were seeing the flop I'd add some more b/f and less c/f.

Turn- maybe closer to 40$ (charge draws more, valuetown qx's)

River- 100$

+1.

Can someone explain the ideas in favor of the check flop side of this discussion. I just don't get the argument. Outside of flopped sets and two pairs, the only made hands that are ahead on the flop are AA (highly unlikely, 'cause no re-raise pre), T8, and 58. The rest of the continuing ranges are draws that lose value when bet to. Yes, it stinks to have 5 in the hand, but that doesn't IMO justify an overly passive line on this low, wet board.

I'm very interested in the other side of this argument. Thanks!

we bet flop and get three callers. yay! now we have a one pair hand that's unlikely to improve and almost as unlikely to see turn and river cards (because once the flop is called, you know those guys are going to the river with this one) that enable our one pair hand to hold up if, in fact, it was good at the time.

instead, we can check flop and get info. if someone behinds us bets, how many callers are there? we can release our hand without giving up that forty dollars. if it checks through, we get to reassess our hand on the turn. our opponents, who don't fold much, aren't any less likely to call bets to chase or to see if their 2nd pair is good, in fact they might be even more.

I would never check this flop against unknowns but I can see an argument for it. However against the described villains checking this flop is horrible and I'm shocked so many people are advocating it. Two nits have already checked so unless they hit a set they're done with the hand and if they did they'll check raise and we'll release. And the two players behind are described as over valuing hands so why would you ever check when you can get called by so much worse. Checking this flop is missing out on so much value.

For those who say bet 100 on the river, do we call if CO shoves? (it'd be 60 to win 405)

We gotta call in that scenario. And I know that sux, but I also think we gotta bet more on the river (like around $100 bet) than maybe we normally would and here's why: The way this hand played out--hero checking the flop and the players behind checking also, and then hero wakes up and bet's the turn Queen and the same villains who were uninterested in the flop now call the turn. Qx is gonna be a HUGE part of their range. Now we get to the river and a relatively innocuous card hits. So here we are on the river when a very likely 2nd best hand is out: Qx, and looking back to preflop, a hand like AQ makes sense every street. This is important. Whenever you're in a situation on the river where 1) your opponent(s) is likely to have a 2nd best hand and 2) he will have a hard time getting away from that hand, you should bet more than whatever you think the usual standard betting amount is.

That's why we gotta bet $100 here imo. We could easily have one of our opponent's trapped with 2nd best that he can't get rid of. Just put yourself in their spot, after a PFR checks the flop and then fires a Q turn and a blank river. Are you gonna find a fold with AQ on the river when the perceived top of the PFR's range in this spot is exactly AQ? No you're not. You're gonna call and go WTF when you see KK. In fact many (most?) average players won't even be able to get away from KQ if hero bets bigger than normal on the river, and bad players can call with any Qx, thus adding more value to our bet.

So that's why I'm betting $100 on the river here, and if it means we sometimes gotta make a weird call against a small UTG raise then so be it, that trouble is worth it (every strategy has it's drawbacks after all). Those people itt who are trying to bet a smaller amount on the river that allows us to safely Bet/fold are playing this spot wrong imo. They're not seeing the fact that we have a captive audience (AQ) who will be willing to pay the price to see what we got. In this situation $100 may actually be too small of a bet. Think about how much you would call in this spot with AQ when the top of the PFR's perceived range is AQ.