V1 has ~300 and is unknown but seems to be somewhat competent. No real history before this hand other than him seeing decently aggro preflop.

V2 is straightforward and has ~125

Hero has both covered and has a slightly aggro image.

Folds to V1
V1 raises in MP to $8
Folds to hero
Hero calls otb with 9T
Folds to V2 who calls in bb

Flop ($25)
Q T 2

Check, check, hero bets $15, V2 folds, V1 calls

Turn ($55)
K
Check, Check

River ($55)
3
Check, hero bets $45

I feel like he c-bets Qx into 2 opponents and Vbets Kx OTR. He can have 44-99 that he x/c flop with and I can have a lot of missed draws.

But I guess he can have AT or JJ as well.

In order to determine whether hero's value bet is too thin or just thick enough, we need to consider the combos in V's range.

X-C hands that beat us
AT - 12 combos with T removed
JTs - 3 combos with T removed
JJ - 6 combos
Total = 21

X-C Hands that we beat
T8s - 3 combos with T removed
99 - 6 combos
88 - 6 combos
77 - 6 combos
66 - 6 combos
55 - 6 combos
44 - 6 combos
Total = 33

I think the real question is whether he actually tries to bluff catch with that wide of a range of pocket pairs, especially to a 4/5 psb. If we change his range to 99-77 then our ratio changes from just thick enough to too thin. I don't see why we couldn't bet something like $30 to get villain to level himself into thinking we're trying to represent exactly the sort of hand we have while really holding 98hh.

i dont think hes on that deep of a level to think that tbh. i think he would be thinking "draws missed, he bet big to try to get me to fold, i call"

that still implies he's thinking

there are very few opponents I would actually bet big for value against to level them into thinking it's a bluff

I like $30-$35 as well if you're going to bet but I don't think betting is correct. With the combos Axel listed, for betting to be +ev villain needs to call about 60% of the time when he has a worse hand (there are 38 worse combos there not 33). I think an average villain would fold a pocket pair more often than not. I also think expecting him to raise all pocket pairs as often as he raises AT/JT/JJ is wrong -- if he only raises {44-99} 25% as often as he raises AT/JT/JJ then we only beat 10 combos and lose to 21 (we reduce the combinations of 44-99 because he takes this line with them less often)

i see a couple problems with this hand fwiw; firstly your bet on the wet flop into 2 players when you can just check behind with a hand that has some showdown value (you're turning it into a bluff in a situation in which you rarely get both players to fold and you're building a pot with a very vulnerable hand), secondly your overall line looks very bluffy. stabbing checked flop IP, checking turn and stabbing brick river. you have showdown equity why not just check behind river with your 3rd pair? your value bet is too thin and is actually a bluff vs. missed straight/flush draws, which you beat at showdown anyway, he should be folding everything you beat and calling with everything you don't in this spot so just check imo.

I'd likely say that your river bet is a bluff rather than a value bet. Struggling to find anything he calls w that is not ahead.

It is only going to be a value bet if over 50% of his calling range you beat. He just doesn't have that. Check and see who wins.

Mkay thanks guys

Somewhat thin with AT. Spew with T9.

Also make it comically small, no matter how face up that might seem.

In arguing for checking flop and checking river, you've successfully argued for betting flop and betting river. congratulations.

yeh, how's that then?