2/5 1k eff - loose passive game for the most part

EP (abc tag) open to 20, one call, I call otb with A2ss, sb calls.

85 - flop: A76 rainbow with one spade
checks to me, I bet 30, sb calls, ep calls

175 - turn: Ax (no flush draws)
checks to me I bet 60, sb calls

300 - river: 5x
sb thinks for 5 seconds and checks

Sb likes to get involved in pots. He's early 60s but nothing tricky abt him. The way he called flop and turn felt like he was bluff catching. Do we squeeze thin value here targeting 88-JJ?

Mostly checking, sb could have better ax or flopped a set pretty easily on this action - don't really see him calling many worse hands either. I would bet the turn a bit larger though. Sb could also try turning some hands we beat into a bluff, putting is in tough spots.

Also even though sb might have peeled a medium pocket pair against smallish pot bet, it may be overly optimistic to target those hands - flop call with ep behind should not be particularly light. Think we are targeting 7x more and that sb also has plenty of missed draws like 89/54 that are done.

seems like he's playing omc, almost always a weak Ax he can have A9+ or you can be chopping, I don't think hes ever calling 3 streets with 88-JJ, probably folds turn with those as well. If he flipped over JJ i doubt you were getting paid. just check back river he already made his mistakes if he has those hands. I think we are value owning ourselves mostly if we bet river.

Check. I don’t think he’s bluffcatching with worse when the main draw completes OTR.

bet 60

Have you ever seen SB 3 bet PF? If he does, we can take some cards out of his range.

Is this a dumb question?

Passive game, don’t think I’ve seen him 3bet…

Wouldn’t he want to lead when he gets there with a straight?

What better hands will fold? I don't think even A3 will fold here, so I say none. You chop with A2, A3, A4 but you lose to all other aces.

What worse hands will call? I don't really see 88-JJ calling again unless you're a known 3-barreller.

Just check back.

I def have many 3 barel bluffs in my game and he has prolly witnessed some.

Problem is that my bluffs would usually pick a bigger size than my hand would would want to bet

If you would bluff with a bigger size, I assume that you'd use the same bigger size with your boats. That's fine and pretty easy to balance a polarized range. However, if all your aces-full hands are in that higher bet range, then a smaller bet is just declaring that you have an ace with a kicker you're not that proud of and you have no bluffs. I stick with my earlier assessment of just check back. Even if you could get calls from 88-JJ occasionally, those are balanced by the calls you get from AT-A8 that beat you.

bet 60

Please stop pretending you have bluffs.

If you're not pretending don't bluff this spot.

This board is hard to have bluffs on but I would try a mergy size w 54s…
Hmmmm maybe you are right, in practice it’s very hard to have bluffs with the line I took and with 99% of opponents being unable to fold Ax

Why are we betting 60 and not say 100?

You can, but 100 means you have an ace and then so does he more times than these small bets that likely still get chuckle-called, embarrass-called, or just call-called a LOT more by more of the hands that you (nicely) allowed him to keep in range with your earlier sizing choices. You have about zero concern getting bluff-ck-raised, and the turned A just pulls a lot of aces out of his continues. I mean of course he can just have AJ or something, but that's ok if he does, you just get to lose this time, but mostly your fantastic turn sizing just makes it so profitable to flick in the old suck bet against some poor fellow, I mean it's still 12 bb which is a LOT, but seems like nothing in this spot, and that's the point. If he snaps and you win, then you can get all armchair-QB on me, but if he thinks and calls or folds, you did it perfectly.

...and against this type of player you can just bet 175 when you beat Ax.

Very villain dependent but against 60 year old I’m checking behind here. Way too many times You end up betting their hands for them in these spots and they show up with AQ-A10 and say I thought you had AK.

This holds plenty of water until the Ace hits the turn. Suddenly "He can't have an ace anymore that kid is full of siht, $60? I call!, $60, no way, blah, I call kid!, oh" Literally every other turn we prob put zero more in the pot (as a bettor or caller) unless we run a flush. This is how you dismantle old fish, not by checking river.

I can get on board with this thinking. Probably would bet a little larger than the turn bet though

You are absolutely correct. I dont know why this didnt go thru my head in game...

I bet 110 and he snaps with 98o

: /

I am surprised he didn’t lead out on river with that hand. I would have thought you only lose to AQ-A8.

I am also surprised but lesson is checking back was the way on this runout. The worst thing was that it led to me not going for thin value in a couple of spots after that from fearing I will value own myself again

...and that's fine, but then we dont bet this river, so it's kinda "half dozen/6"

110 just too much. 60 is fine and then you laugh when he calls.

It's hard to endorse H's line here. We take a value line when we just don't have a lot of value here given preflop action. We have no big Aces and our mid-pairs/bluffs need equity denial/polarized line. When EP checks a rainbow board, even our sets want to let him catch up ott. So flop is check or bigger bet.

So the overall problem is that H's line doesn't fit the situation. OTT, all our mid-pairs, bluffs and semi-bluffs need a polarized line in position.

I don't get to the river this way. If I did, I suppose I'm b/f.