Hi guys,

I will ask a stupid question that came to my mind after playing a hand like a donkey. Basically, we can resume it by "why can't we 3barrel bluff with almost anything on certain runouts if we are confident in the fact that villain won't respect MDF".

So here is the hand (villain is unknown), with a few questions aswell:

1) OTT, which factors make you pick your bluffs, and what is the hierarchy? For example, first does villain respect MDR, secondly your equity, and lastly how many runouts are likely to piss off villain?
Because I found analysing this hand that MDF almost never applies on early stages of a hand, especially on the flop (at least when the board does not favor massively one player).
So the question that came to my mind is how do solver pick up their bluffs/value hands and calculate their EV?

2) I analysed turn and river and with my set of assumptions, we have a profitable bluff with ATC as he folds almost 2/3rd of his range OTT. If this sounds optimistic to you, I would guess that even if this might be true, I think he folds at the very least 50%. so barreling with a 66%pot sizing with ATC becomes +EV. Why don't we see this in real life, excepting the fact that if villain notices our play, he will adjust?
The river is a breakeven/slightly losing bluff with almost ATC (for sure losing with Ax without s, Jx too.), I think that MDF-wise the population will call enough to avoid us making a bluff with ATC (folding AJo,AJ, the few TT-99 he calls OTT,JTs ~= 44% of his range).
But my point is that on a shitload of better runnouts, we actually can bet ATC to make profit. So why is noone doing that in practice? Where am I wrong? I feel like villain's capacity to adjust to us is a bit overrated.

Thanks if you take the time to read/answer!