But one more adjective to describe player profile will make big difference.
If you will specify additional adjective something like ( LAG,TAG,predictable,mixed ,strighforward,tricky,optimist,passive,agressive).
Two adjectives will make BIG difference when making more exact assumption(reads).
Two adjectives will make possible to project what strategies player takes to be succesfull.
The specific strategy will get you closer to read his pocket.
Example: BB,UTG are decent LAGs.
What is strategy of DECENT LAG on 1-2$,6-Max FullTilt?
Well,a decent LAG has to be tricky and more than average frequent bluffer and semi bluffer. He is better than average hole reader.
He needs such attributes to regain value lost by entering game with “weak hands”
Huge benefit for LAG is that he can play monsters straightforward without losing value in contrast to tight players.
What about card ranges?

I can expect wider range of pocket-cards not only preflop stage but later streets also.
etc..

However there is possibility that this is communication problem.
I read all comments and I do not see anybody to complain about that.
English is not my native language and I do not play on tilt.
I see that your “short” description of players was not obstacle at all to conclude very narrow hand ranges and specific range of actions to choose.

As played I do not think your river bet is that bad. AJ is still a big part of his range here, and will definitely call the half pot bet, though I see the merit in a slightly smaller bet to pick up some value from the flushes. I do not see any way you could have played the river that would have let you get away from the hand. With just over a pot-sized bet remaining, you just can’t check behind QQ on that board when your ahead of 90% of his range. As you said, a smaller bet would have been a bluff inducer so you would be committed to call even then. Though I do think you passed up a cheap opportunity to define your opponent’s hand on the flop.

A J never folds there. I really disagree with BilboSan on this one. Very, very few players will get away from a J in a 6-max game. The ranges are just naturally wider than in a FR game and the players are more aggressive.

Here are a couple of scenarios:

If BB flopped a spade flush, he can’t call a bet here for the most part. Or at least he has to think pretty hard about folding. If Ed is sitting on some unmade hand that he was calling with position, he’s going to be able to move the BB off his hand a lot. If Ed is sitting on AsX or even KsX it is in his interest to call the BB bets and let the SB bloat the pot. When his spades don’t come in, he can make a bluff that looks like a value bet very easily.

Ed can be on 8Ts and be making the same play.

Ed can be on TTs. For the most part Ed would check this back on the river, but not everyone is Ed. TT could be looking for the crying call from a flopped spade flush.

Ed could be on AJ, QJ, KJ, TJ and sometimes J9s and any J now chops.

A J just won’t fold.

For the villain to have a J, though, he probably has to have a spade if he’s donk leading both streets. That’s a little tougher because most players won’t call offsuit J’s in the BB. But, the weak SB player complicates things because he’s going to bring along some weaker hands. AJo, TJo and QJo just aren’t out of the question even though they aren’t particularly likely.

It’s no guarantee that 2 spades aren’t going to look you up there either for many of the same reasons. The spades are often going to fold, but the bet is fairly small and AsX or KsX is a big enough part of Ed’s range that you could consider a crying call. You’d hate it, but you’d have to think about it.

If this were a full ring game then all of this is out the window and BliboSan’s QQ+ makes much more sense.

well there’s always going to be a brain sacrifice the more tables you play. 6 table poker ain’t like chess where you have like 10 minutes to make a move ;]

I’m thinking that there’s a different skill that you need to master which probably involves doing a lot of homework, working out common yet complex patterns and figuring out how you play them ahead of time so that you win them 2/3 of the time.

I think you need to accept the fact that you’re always going to be on autopilot

I’m just not so clear this is true. Better players are more than capable of firing at a scary board with the naked As or a couple of other holdings + air. Either calling the turn or raising the flop and making that the last money you put in isn’t so bad. This is 1/2-6max, not 5/10 full ring.

On the river, wtf. Both of you should be shoving for value.

Why?
Suited flop, turn and river twists.
This type of board always creates roller-coaster with player assets on every street.
For example: Imagine situation that BB has flush with AS Ks .
In this scenario BB has roller-coaster downhill.
BB hits flop very hard.Turn card and especially river one are nightmare to his dreams.
he knows exactly UTG holdings.His betting on flop and turn define UTG hands perfectly.I agree.
But UTG can not have so exact read.(betting range vs calling range).OK
BB is committed, he knows he is hopeless loser.
Frustration or maybe tilt helps him to make hopeless bluff-check raise.
Hey,awful river bet can be tilt trigger.

1. I don’t like getting it all-in on the flop. Getting it in with AA with the As is considerably stronger. First, with AA you’re never drawing dead, whereas with QQ you’re sometimes drawing nearly dead to Ax or Kx of spades. Second, with AA you’re crushing hands like KJ with the Ks, but with QQ you’re nearly 50/50 with the same hand. So overall, you’re going to have considerably better equity with AA than with QQ if you get it all-in.

2. Basically I agree with everything BilboSan said both here and in the previous post. The hand reading here depends strongly on the strength of the players. In particular, the weaker the player, either BB or UTG, the more likely they are to show up at the end here with just a jack. That fact changes the dynamics of the hand considerably.

3. I think my line here is more or less ok (with the exception of the sizing of the river bet) against weakish players in the BB who can have hands like QJ (no spade) up to and through the river check. I’d either like a smaller river bet or actually sometimes a river shove depending on how bad the player is. The point of the small bet is to get crying calls from flushes and jacks and possibly to induce a bad bluff-raise. The point of the shove is simply to extract the maximum from a player who simply can’t lay a jack down here. My in-between bet size is just plain bad.

4. Against better players the whole hand is basically a clusterfuck for me. Against strong players who read hands well, I’m in a serious reverse implied odds situation. I’m drawing to a flush that won’t get paid but that can be drawing dead already. Other than that, I have a one pair hand against a player who is already representing something stronger. The only card I really like is a Q… and it’s possible I won’t even get paid on that card. So I’m basically hoping my opponent is light and that I’ll be able to check it down. But if he’s not, I’m going to be essentially forced to fold, and occasionally (as it happened) a bad card will come for me and I’ll end up getting stacked. So against these players I like just folding the turn.

5. Against bad BB players who have jacks a lot of the time on the turn, a turn minraise could actually be a good play. I’d expect a 3-bet from hands that have me crushed, and I’d expect a call from hands I have beaten. If my opponent is very light on his range, then a small turn raise could be good. In this situation against this player, though, raising the turn would just be putting in more money in a bad situation.

Also, to the person who said that it’s good to see I make mistakes… I actually make a lot of mistakes. First of all, mistakes are essentially unavoidable when you’re moving up/playing against a whole class of new players. When you expect people to have jacks as a major part of their range, and you happen to be playing against an unknown (so far) player for whom jacks is not a big part of their range, you’re set up to make some really bad plays.

I also suck at multitabling still. I don’t make decisions fast enough, my time bank is always low, and I’m often playing hands on autopilot/scrambling to make quick decisions. I could play fewer tables, but I figure that if I practice playing 6-7 tables, I’ll get faster. Whenever you want to learn a new skill, you have to build in a certain length of sucking time before you master it, and if you back off or make it easier for yourself, sometimes you never get there.

Fortunately, there are enough really soft players in the games at the moment that I can butcher a significant number of hands and still win at a nice clip.