I think the line you took postflop is excellent. We really don’t want to build a pot or even think about protection on the flop, the only hands which might be worth folding out are low spades and villain should have a lot less of those than medium to high spades. Getting value from draws is great but there are enough hands better than ours that it becomes pretty thin, not to mention hands that can put us in a really tough spot with a bluff-raise (even before considering your read on villain). It’s difficult to pot control out of position, but we can still increase our chance of reaching showdown with our marginal hand by not giving the villain a raising opportunity.

Leading the turn looks good and I’d probably consider it on a lot of relatively blank cards too, offsuit 9 and 7-3 being the most likely candidates. Both players’ ranges are weaker after the flop checks through, so I think TPTK is strong enough to start looking for value.

There aren’t many river situations where I prefer to check/call for value instead of bet/fold but this is a good example of one. There are a few 2 pairs we may miss value from when they check back, but I can’t imagine how we win often enough when called. Once we check, I think spades are the cards most likely to be over-bluffed. Obviously, we’re paying off flushes a good portion of the time, but I think we’re winning more often than we need to vs. most players to justify calling an even larger bet than 3/5 pot.

I will make two comments on sizing:

– Your preflop 3bet should be much larger out of position at nearly 200bb deep. Even 4.5x (2250) would be on the small side, but reasonable. I think I’d be looking to 5x (maybe even 6x vs a min-raise) at these stack depths.

– Based on the hands you’ve posted recently, it seems like you are almost exclusively betting 1/2 pot postflop. This is not a problem per se, and definitely not a priority to work on as you’ve only recently returned to playing regularly but, while reviewing hands, you may want to think about how certain board textures could benefit from varying your sizing. Not remotely connected to this hand, just wanted to mention that in general.

EDIT: Uh-oh, I am probably wrong if Andrew disagrees with me, time to put on my thinking cap.

I think my reasoning was based on a number of assumptions, none of which are concrete. Namely:

1. Both players’ ranges (especially the preflop caller) are heavily weighted to suited combos and pairs

2. Neither player is checking the flop with a made flush

3. We aren’t betting QsQx and JsJx on the turn

4. We are value betting the river with all of our As combos and at least some Qs combos

5. The villain is not value-betting hands weaker than 9s x

I’m moving slowly this morning and I’m out of time to finish this but, if we buy into those assumptions, you might see why I actually think Ax weak kicker is a somewhat reasonable bluff. Obviously, those assumptions are of varying reliability and especially #2 is fairly dubious. I’ll try to follow up later today.