Villain is 20/5 over 40 hands, so no sick reads or anything.

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $2 BB (6 handed) Converter Tool from (Format: Bet The Pot)

SB ($545.25)
BB ($182)
UTG ($200)
Hero ($226)
CO ($73.70)
Button ($168.35)

Preflop: Hero is MP with XX
Hero raises to $7, 1 fold, Button calls $7, 2 folds.

Flop: ($17) , , (3 players)
Hero bets $14, Button calls $14.

Turn: ($45) (3 players)
Hero bets $36, Button calls $36.

River: ($117) (3 players)
Hero bets $169 (All-In)

It's $111 for him to call on the river.

Question #1) Is bluffing profitable here?

Question #2) What hands should be in my range that I can turn into a bluff here?

Question #3) Are there any hands I should be c/c the river with?

I think these are all somewhat difficult questions, so if you can only answer one or two feel free to ignore the one you can't.

He'll fold [Js] , and [Ts] type hands
He might call with [Qs]

I cant think of much else he can have here that folds, so I dont like this as a bluff.

So..

1) No
2) I think you can turn your whole range into a bluff here if you put him on a small enough range and think he cant call......although i think this is a mistake which leads back to the answer to question #1
3) Read dependant...not many IMO against a 20/5 guy unless hes known to make river bluffs when hes checked to

1. I really doubt it unless you have him as a habitual flop and turn floater. Youll fold out TT (QJ if he is slowplaing), maybe an AJ,AQ type of hand. He will call you with any hit draw (he is never folding str8 och flush to that river bet). If you have seen him slowplaying big hands before I would be very careful.

2. AcX, I dont really like semi bluffing the turn with any other hand.

3. AK but I wouldnt bet turn with AK save if I had Ac.

If hes 20 / 5 hes probably also passive so I think its possible he has [Tc] or [9c] and didnt raise anywhere.

He could call with JJ, 55, KQ or KJ...maybe AK?

You probably think he wont flat call preflop with some of those hands but Im pretty aggro over all (more aggro than this guy for sure) but I still do flat call with some of those hands sometimes so I cant eliminate them.

With no read, I doubt I would shove this river as a bluff or for value. I probably just block the river for about $50.

Ice I know you're not a big math guy, but I"m pretty sure I could do some maths and show that betting $50 on the river for value while never bluff shoving cannot be correct. Here's why...

If he calls less than 50% of the time when I shove, then bluff shoving is profitable.

If he calls more than 50% of the time, then value shoving is more profitable than betting $50.

I'm honestly not trying to call you out Ice so don't take this personally, but I think this is a good example of why math really is so important in poker. It will let you see when you have two beliefs which are mutually exclusive and thus cannot both be right.

lol my avatar is still hilarious

What if he calls more than 50% when youre bluffing and folds more than 50% when youre value shoving?

I understand what youre saying, but my whole game is based on the fact that I like to put him on a much tighter range (and Im pretty good at it) than most good players do. Most good players try to figure out his entire range and then use math to determine what bet sizes is best based on how often they think a bluff will be called vs how often a value bet will be called. Thats fine...buts its not my game.

I try to make the best play possible vs the exact hand I think he has. Obviously Im not always right about the exact hand he has but if I can narrow it down much further than most people, I can do a better job of sizing my bet correctly. I believe Im an above avg hand reader which is greatly helped by playing 3 table most of the time. Ive tried more tables and I feel lost and its obvious to me that my reads have turned into guesses.

I only said he might call more than 50% when youre bluffing and fold more than 50% when youre value shoving because you said:

"If he calls less than 50% of the time when I shove, then bluff shoving is profitable.

If he calls more than 50% of the time, then value shoving is more profitable than betting $50."

The point is that you dont know what percentage hes going to do what with. You cant have it both ways just like I cant have it both ways.

PS..theres a on tha board so you cant have that but youre right that you could have [6c], however I doubt that you would shove with it very often.

Ice please explain how I'm trying to have it both ways.

It's very simple. Villain is calling a certain % of the time whether I'm value shoving or bluff shoving as he cannot see my hand, and that % fluctuates a tiny bit based on what cards I have in my hand as they can't be in his. If that % (of folds) is over 50%, then bluff shoving is profitable. If that % is under 50%, then value shoving is better than betting $50 unless some other weird stuff happens which is unlikely and not even a point you've tried to make (like he'll call $50 with any pair and shove with trips+, making betting $50 with a full better than shoving).

What do I personally believe? I believe villain is folding here about 70% and it's a great spot to bluff.

My point is that you dont know if hes going to call or fold more often than the other, so you cant know if its a better spot to be bluffing or a better spot to be value betting.

Obviously if he folds alot then bluffing is profitable and if he calls alot then value shoving is better than betting $50, but thats like saying if I score more runs than you in a baseball game, I'll beat you.

I guess Im not very good at explaining myself because I cant seem to get you to iunderstand what im trying to say although its very clear to me when its rattling around in my head.