Hero - 35 Reg TAG
Villain - 55 Reg Loose Passive. Never folds FD and is stationy with PP
1/2 Horseshoe Cincinnati

Hero is UTG with AQcc and raise to $7
Folded to Villian (button) who calls
Blinds fold

Flop Qh6h8c (pot 17)

Hero bets $14 and villain calls

Turn 2c (pot 45)

Hero bets $30 and villain calls

River Qs

Obviously unless he has slowplayed a set, his range should be so many sd/fd combos that it will be unlikely he calls a river bet. Is it better to bet here and hope that he Hero calls or should we check to induce a bet?

I decided to bet because he is so passive.............. Anyone disagree and why?

Definitely betting the river against the described V. A river check would work a lot better against an agro villain willing to take a big stab on the river with a missed draw. I think you lost value on the turn by only betting 2/3 pot against someone described as "stationy". Also you should include stack sizes here.

Never check this.

We must absolutely not expect our passive villain to bet his 97, which is a small part of his range. He will just check it back anyway and say "I missed."

We should absolutely value-own his worse trips. Think about it. Is this villain ever folding QK, QJ, or QT here? No. He has trips!

Target that part of his range. Bet big. Close to the pot. I like $90.

There is also a good chance he thinks we are FOS and calls with 99,TT,JJ. You said he was stationy with PP.

Let's reiterate and throw in some guesstimates. If we check, we are trying to win a weak $50 bluff when he has 97. Let's give him 6 combos of that since he folds many of the unsuited ones preflop. Also he probably doesn't bet them anyway, so let's say we make $10 from that play on average (this is a very generous estimate).

If we bet $90, we are winning that amount from KQ, QJ, QT, and sometimes 99-JJ. Maybe he folds those PP half the time, so that's 21 (12 trips + 9 PP) combos.

We could win $10 six ways or $90 twenty-one ways. The ratio is: $60 vs. $1,890. Checking here is a disaster.

There is absolutely no reason to be afraid of sets here. That's MUBS. He hasn't done anything to make us think he has a set. If he raises us we will have to decide whether he has a FH or is overplaying trips, and I likely find a fold to a passive player.

I like making a half-pot size bet. Most likely he missed his draw. Maybe he has KQ or QJ and will pay you off. But if you check, he's almost always checking behind given the fact that he's loose/passive.

Gotta disagree with this. I think betting $60 is making a $30 mistake (maybe even bigger). This is a prison rape spot. For me, I see the question as: do we bet $90 here to avoid the $100 psyche-out, or do we overbet the pot to look bluffy because we might get called anyway? Like, do we bet $90...or $150?

If we bet $60 when $90 would have been called, we just burned away 15bb from our winrate. If a spot similar to this comes up once every 5 hours, that's 3bb/hour. Properly sizing value bets is what separates the marginal winners from the crushers at these stakes imo.

Also, OP, we need to know the stack sizes.

Against this sort of V, if you check, he's probably insta-mucking, saying 'I missed'. Unless the V has shown a tendency to bluff missed draws in the past, I'm value-betting this river for sure. V is likely to look us up with pretty much any pair on this board, since he can very easily justify a call in his mind because there is a missed FD out there. The Q pairing also makes it much more likely for him to call with his inderpairs/underpairs. Probably betting about $95, to make it look bluffy, but below the $100 threshold.

bet river please

Agreed

Agreed. Even the most passive player will likely show some aggression on such a wet board with a set so I kinda dismissed that alternative.

I appreciate the thoughts

Good points. Based on my reads, I thought it was very unlikely that he had any pair at all. I thought that he would pay off any sized bet with nearly any pair but his hand was so face up, I couldn't see him paying off any sized bet.

I took this line and bet and he instamucked which made me consider the other option but I think that you are correct and over time, this will be more profitable.

Is this 1/2? What are stack sizes? What was the standard pre-flop raise?

Grunch

Passive villains don't bet underpairs or rep hands because... well.... THEY ARE PASSIVE!!!!!

aggro villains will bet, bluff, rep, etc because... well... THEY ARE AGGRO!!!!!

Loose passive villains overcall. So the most optimal line against a loose passive will always be to bet it when we have it

Grunch

First, I hate the title to this thread.

Second, be carefull what you wish for. Are you *really* going to ck-call a possible all-in wager? Who is the passive one here?
The better play is to maintain pot control and think more about bet sizing...obviously your V is calling you down after you lead, and then bet, bet, and could have bet again.

Third, and lastly but not least; What you're really doing is losing value!

-better than average players get value from their really good hands & take minimum loses on their losing hands. Very good players =good value from their strong/winning hands, minimum loss's from losing hands, and maximum value from marginal hands.

EDIT, OMG....I'm such a dumbazz. I'm tired tonight. The last sentence on your post said you you also leed out on the river...good job, smart play -you kept control of the pot size and maximized value!

$31/100/jam. Described villain isn't folding his draws so we need to charge him to chase them to the max.

I like the overbet otr(unless you are both very deep stacked). I feel like if he is going to call a PSB otr he almost always has a Q, and I think described villain will never fold trips.