1/2 NL 200 max

Effective Stacks

Villain: 180
Hero: 250

Hero has super tight image and has only played 3 hands besides the blinds in an hour and won all 3, showing super strong hands.
Villain is limper he is rather splashy, doesn't seem very concerned with position but plays decently tight after the flop.

Hero is LP with 3d3c, 1 limper in front, hero limps, button limps, small and big blind call

FLOP

3s 5d 10h

sb, bb, limper check, hero bets 10, everyone folds to villain (limper) who calls.

TURN

Qd, villain checks, hero checks behind

River 8c

villain bets 25, hero raises to 80, villain calls

now before i explain what each player had and why i checked the turn, i would like some analysis on if you think i missed any value in this hand? I appreciate the input

Meh, I probably bet the turn as well. $25, and if he calls and checks again on the river I bet $60 and call a shove, obv. I think it's a lot better to try to get 3 streets of value from your sets rather than trying to bluff catch the river. He's rarely going to bet/call the river without two pair, so I think I like to bet the turn and get him to call with TP and then he might feel compelled to call the river as well.

Checking the turn is a big big mistake that loses a ton of value, BT mentioned stuff like this is one of his recent videos, checking in spots like this doesn't look a big error sometimes because it's not easy to see the EV of the play, but it loses a lot of value.

I chose to check the turn for two reasons
1. disguise the strength of my hand
2. get him to value bet a medium strength hand on the river.

This was the logic behind my play:

I had only been showing down very good hands to this point, my betting the flop lets the other players know two things, either i have a hand again this time that is very good, or im using my reputation to convey that i have a good hand again. the villain put the money in on the flop rather quickly so that let me know he either had a draw, which considering this villain him having a 46, 24, or even a gutshot with 67 or a2 was not in his range to float me with this out of position, or he had some sort of a 10, judging by what hands he had played before this i narrowed it to either k10 or a10 suited. When the Q came on the turn completing no draw i chose to check the turn for the above two reasons. This way i believe to the villain i make my hand look like some sort of 10 thats just looking to check down, such as j10 suited or whatnot. His bet on the river made perfect sense for him to do given the situation. He can be sure i wasn't in there with j9 cause that was not in my range at that time and he wanted to get value out of another 10 (he had a10). I my checkraise was i believe exactly where it should have been seeing as it almost looks like a bluff as i made it different from my other raises, acting rather quickly and sort of stared at him, giving off a false tell here and there. Being so young i think also makes other players think younger players have a tendency to bluff more and can't control their tells. He called rather quickly and was surprised to see i had a set. I think it would have been easier for him to get away from, however, if i had bet all 3 streets considering the hands i had bet all streets on before. I changed up my play throughout the session and mixed up things i had done earlier that showed strength when i was weak, etc. and booked a nice win. The win is worthless without trying to get max value out of every situation though. As always, information and criticism is welcome.

its ok if you don't have a link to the video, but i would like to hear what townsend had to say, he seems like one of the more logical players in the game that really thinks through every decision after a hand is over

keep it simple and don't overanalyze, especially at $1/2 live. On the one hand you're saying that your tight reputation will prevent you from getting action on the turn, but on the other you're arguing that you can appear to bluff raise the river (one of the strongest moves in NL HE). If you'd like to give off false tells then do so when betting on the turn. You want to make the profitable plays, and with a set that's to build as large a pot as possible so long as you appear to be ahead. He was probably surprised to see you with a set not because your raise fooled him, but because he wasn't thinking at all about your hand.

On then turn you want to maximise your value against his range of hands.
You put him on a good range on the flop, JT-AT or less likely, but possible, some kind of low straight draw. You probably have to include 55 in his range too but tha chances he has that are slim compared to some kind of T.

You definitely want to bet the turn against this range. QT is definitely calling and most likely raising, JT/KT/AT may find a fold on the turn but if you bet smallish, 2/3 pot villain will find it harder to fold. If the villain has diamonds + pair of tens he is definitely calling and betting 2/3 pot will give him the wrong odds to call.

So basically I think you should bet the turn, but not too strong to scare away a ten, because there are lots of hands you can get value from.

Yeah I noticed what trystero pointed out too.

You say you didn't bet the turn because he views you as tight and he's not going to call with a medium strength hand like a ten but then you can make a big raise on the river and get paid because he probably views you as bluffy.

It can't be both.

i thought by doing something i had not normally done when i was strong would indicate that this was my first attempt at a bluff

I think this is where I differ from your thought process...

If villain is playing tight after the flop and he check bet the flop it seems to me that he has enough interest in the hand to call modest bets all the way down...

as far as value maximization from sets on dry boards... it's opponent dependent... but from what you were saying I would have to imagine villain having a strong ten or two pair...

The turn, the turn, the turn, the turn. Bet it. It makes the pot big enough to shove the river.