Think I'm too MUBSY on flushes

Hand 1 is fine, but I would bet turn sometimes. He could easily have a worse A. Check/call or check/fold river depending on how passive V really is.

Hand 2 I probably check the turn and evaluate river.

Would be much more worried about flushes in the second hand than the first, due to the bigger flop bet and not much else that hits anything.

Flop sizings are kind of reversed, would be more likely to bet bigger on AT4 than on T63.
Also SPR with a small stack size and bigger open in H1 make it feel like a bet big flop and shove most turns.

H1 on river seems like a std. check and decide.

H1, maybe bet like 80 on the river to fold out weak flushes.

1H

I think it's okay to check/call here OTR. But it really depends on many factors - tells, bet sizing etc.

He should check back the turn with a bunch of flushes for "balance," but almost nobody does that at 1/3. Also, he should value bet all single flush cards, 7x♥ or 6x.

So if any factor indicates that he is polarized, you can call.

OTT
Check is standard. That card is bad for your range and good for your oponent.

I am curious about your "factors."

What specific tells/bet sizing patterns are you looking for to determine check/call versus check/fold OTR?

H2

Hmmm. The flop bet is pretty interesting. At first, I thought it was odd and considered just going for a normal size. A 1/3 pot bet here is standard against a typical preflop range, but if this guy is a "loose passive calling station with very wide ranges pre and post-flop," what should our bet sizing really be? Since our range is way ahead of his on the flop, any thoughts on the ideal sizing?

As played

Check back on the turn. That's the problem with your overbet. If you bet 1/3 pot on the flop, he calls with a bunch of weaker hands, and then you can value bet again or check back and snap call the river. But since you overbet, he mostly calls with made hands and flush draws. So, a T or a club on the turn massively improves his range.

Do you really feel safe calling a blank river now? I don't think so.

If this guy instantly bets $100, I might just call. I don't think anyone would instantly bet with a 6♥ here. He would need time to evaluate his hand.

That you describe both villains as calling stations means you should be looking to value bet, especially IP on a blank river in HH2.

I prefer a x/fold on the river, however, in HH1 because "loose-passive" doesn't translate to villain bluffing/betting thin.

In HH1 you possibly missed a bet on the turn but I don't dislike checking with the plan of betting decent rivers. 2♥ isn't a decent river, unfortunately.

Yeah that makes sense in terms of Polarization.

One saying I always remember "Against very loose players, there's no such thing as a scare card for you"

Of course it's not 100% true, but I keep barrelling against these players.

yup.

Of course the flip side of not ever having a scare card is that there's no blanks either. Any 2 could have given he 2 pairs on the second example!

Results:

So my takeaway is - just bet/fold smaller for thinner value. Especially with 1pair that doesn't often improve. I'm not sure how to approach it IP vs OOP. Its much tougher OOP because check/calling leaves us in the dark. Block betting 1/4-1/3rd maybe? Idk.

After seeing this showdown in H2, would you bet on the river in similar scenario? Given V's called two streets this light suggests it's mandatory to bet, probably a shove. The mindset of villain is either "I can hit my two pair/trips draw" or "I think this guy has AK and is full of it". If he's definitely in the latter category it's a must bet, but even if he's in the former it's a spot where perhaps you can bet smaller. To me H2 is a perfect example of where your profiling of villain matches reality, which means you should implement a "max-exploit" strategy.