Villain is 44/10/0.6
I am trying to figure out board textures where I can feel like I have value bet AK/AQ UI on the river against this kind of opponent.

Full Tilt Poker $3/$6 Limit Hold'em - 4 players
The Official 2+2 Hand Converter Powered By DeucesCracked.com

Pre Flop: (1.5 SB) Hero is BB with A K
CO raises, 2 folds, Hero 3-bets, CO calls

Flop: (6.5 SB) 8 Q 5 (2 players)
Hero bets, CO calls

Turn: (4.25 BB) 6 (2 players)
Hero bets, CO calls

River: (6.25 BB) 6 (2 players)
Hero ?

I think this is wtsd/read dependent. Did you ever saw him calling A-hi?

Yes, I did esp vs me as I have aggressive image. I am trying to figure out what boards are more "inviting" to think that he has nothing but a worse A hi. He wouldn't raise any street with just a pair. If he raises I know he has at least two pair and have an easy fold.

I don't think this is a good time. It sounds to me that villain will go into call down mode with too many hands that beat you here, and a Q high board can elicit folds from weak peeling hands, even from passive players. You're basically hoping for A9-AJ (& maybe a little less) here, and I think those hands should lose a little weight somewhere along the way.

Since we're talking about V-betting AK against loose players, here's one hand that I thought was completely awesome as I played it. Villain is 64/14/1 overall in my pokertracker, but unsure about 3-handed at the time.

Full Tilt Poker $0.50/$1 Limit Hold'em - 3 players
The Official 2+2 Hand Converter Powered By DeucesCracked.com

Pre Flop: (1.5 SB) Hero is BTN with K A
Hero raises, SB 3-bets, 1 fold, Hero caps!, SB calls

Flop: (9 SB) 7 2 4 (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets, SB calls

Turn: (5.5 BB) 6 (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets, SB calls

River: (7.5 BB) 8 (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets

This is about how good you can get money in with AK UI, IMO. Villain has shown no aggression, though he would likely do so with an overpair here. The texture is great for peeling, and a loose opponent will likely talk themselves into calling river with weaker hands.

Can you please explain a bit more. To me this is a clear check. If villain calls your bet, he beats you >50%.

Doesn't that board look pretty blank for either of us? It seems like neither of our ranges hit that board, so our hands are highly likely unimproved here. Also, villain has somewhat of an AF for his looseness, so I'd expect a raise somewhere along in the hand with an overpair. (Of course, he could be going into calldown mode if he can handread. I doubt a 64/11/1 can, though.).
Also, weak one pair hands are unlikely due to his PF 3-bet, and his VPIP : PFR ratio. He would likely just cold call his weak pocket pairs, suited connectors, and weak A's, hoping to see a flop.
Doesn't his PF range, coupled with high discounting of stronger hands, make this a clear bet? It looks like he has a fellow AK, or AQ/AJ so often here. He's loose, so I think he's calling those often enough.

And, it obv. worked since I posted it.

Thanks Thamel

I take your points on board and agree that we are probably ahead. Where I struggle is that when he does call, he is far more likely to beat you than not. You capped PF so villain should realise you have at the very least AJ, meaning he shouldn't be calling you without a hand.

Just because he should realize I have a strong range against his loose / passive preflop stats, doesn't mean he will. He's just SO polarized to AJ-AK here, and I really think I get called by those often enough to offset the times he surprises me with 99+

Its probably a good time to try it and see. I would C/C though, let him try a bluff with his KJ or suited connectors You are basically go after AJ,AT and A9 here.

the hand thamel posted provides a great contrast between hands where you should and should not vbet AK. in thamel's hand you can put villain on a pretty specific range given his preflop aggression and postflop passivity.

in the OP, this passive villain can easily have any of the available pairs. its hard to be good 51% of the time you're called when that is the case.

Very good stuff, Thamel - I agree with your points and think that my bet on the river in the original hand was a spew (even though the villain paid me off with AJ )

so the question is to make a thin value bet to get called by a Ax or Kx type of hand or induce.

since you have an ace and a king, there is slightly more chance than normal that he doesn't have one. however, there are a LOT of 9,T,J combos that all missed. for this reason i would check to induce instead of vbetting.

if your opponent was a different type, i would bet for value. the ones i'm thinking of are the ones who will semi-bluff raise at some point if he did have a 9,T,J comboish hand. Since he didn't raise, i would say it's more likely he's got a weak show downable hand and I'll just VB. judging from the stats alone, your opponent doesn't seem like this type so c/c river is my vote.

I don't think Thamel's hand has much to do with this hand. His hand is a good spot to VB ace-high in position, but that doesn't mean this is a bad spot to VB ace-high OOP. Personally I like the bet here because I don't think you induce very often when you check and I don't want to fold. I mean, the guy is 44/10/.6. If he's not raising a gutshot before the river, he's not betting one for us on the river very often. It might shade towards a bluff, but I'm betting T9/JT here too probably, so he should be calling down with some Ax stuff.

It's called contrast. In my example, villain's range is greatly polarized due to his AF and postflop play. In OP's example, villain could have any pair, along with other hands, due to his low AF. Also, LOL at playing JT / T9 like this, 3-betting preflop and trying to bluff a calling station. Also, probably take a free card on turn since villain will give you one much too often. I think check/fold > Bet/fold >>>> Check / call in OP's example. Villain won't go for thin value on river, and he doesn't seem to be the type to bluff often enough after getting this far on a board w/o draws.

It's not an either/or question and the fact that he's a station who could have any pair doesn't make it a bad bet.

If you want to argue that he's got a huge range and that means it's a bad spot to 3-bet wide and barrel a lot of hands, I disagree, but that's ok. If you want to say he's not that aggro and probably has a narrow range, then that's fine. But you're saying he's got a wide range and so we should narrow (and seemingly polarize) our own range beginning preflop and continuing postflop, which is wrong, imo.

Just because he can have any pair doesn't mean he actually does. It's pretty hard to make a pair. The one objection that's pretty reasonable to a bet is that 76 made a pair on the turn and just rivered trips, but I don't know that it's the end of the world.

3-betting out of the BB is a move made for when you have some form of bluffing equity postflop, not to bloat OOP against a player that may put you to tough decisions on whether to make a bluff or not. I'm playing a lot of hands in the BB against a bad player opening, but I'm not going to start 3-betting like a maniac unless he's somehow loose, passive, and not very showdown bound (Good luck finding somebody like that!). What's wrong with polarizing our range? It's not like villain is going to try to read our hands anyways.