[Nick C]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think a question to consider here is whether or not he's reliably loose and passive enough that we can check-fold both the turn and river. It seems like a lot to ask for, but StellarWind did call him "very loose/passive."

[/ QUOTE ]
The ten gives a free card roughly never and the ace not very often. When the turn checks through it's obvious to value bet the river.

That's the way it actually happened and he paid off. I don't know what he had.

I'm not very happy with my decision to check the turn. The ace on board should protect me from a bluff raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

If a turn check-through nearly rules out Ax, then it seems to me that there is one big advantage to playing the hand the way you did, which is that you can value bet the river with confidence instead of betting into God knows what on the turn. (Or would merely getting called on the turn also be a strong enough indication that we have a river bet, giving us two potential streets of value?)

Of course, a good chunk of the worse hands that would've called the turn will fold the river, but at least you still get value from 3x and 66 and maybe even a curious KQ/KJ/KXs.

Nevertheless, I must have an exaggerated notion of "very loose/passive" in mind, because I wasn't aware that we were worried about a turn bluff-raise very much at all. And if the turn bluff-raise is a concern, then a plain old turn bluff (or "value" bet from a worse hand) after we check must really be.