[private joker]

Limit holdem tendencies have driven me to consider value betting first, then wondering if checking is superior. But when I play NL, I notice that the constant fear of draws completing and other weak-tight tendencies are common among good players, so I'm thinking maybe there's just less value betting in general in proper NLHE strategy.

What's the case in this hand?

5/10 live, 400 max. I've got 370 or so, unknown villain in SB has me covered.

Bad EP player limps, I raise on the button with AT to 40 (I'm targeting an SPR of 4 and expecting 1 call). SB calls, BB and EP limper fold.

Flop comes JT5 with 2 spades, I have the Ts. SB checks, I bet 50, SB calls. Pot is 190 now.

Turn is a T. He checks, I bet 90 of my 280 left, leaving me with 190 (is this a horrible bet size? Should I just shove it in with a big overbet? I sort of wanted to milk him if he had a J while denying him odds to call with KQ). He calls.

River is the 7s. He checks. Assuming he has either a J or a draw, what's the value in betting here? (Obviously any bet is a shove, so I don't have to worry about being raised).

I don't see people calling river bets here with top pair too much (even live players tend to tighten up to a third barrel), but clearly he's never laying down a flush. But I dunno... are we fearing the draw or trying to max value?