Could be some give ups that will fold to a river bet (not a lot, considering the board) but those will not bet-check-bet bluff anyway on this kind of board.

I like how you played the hand but river seems tricky. Only size against a reg should be a shove I think but what is he gonna call us with really? Especially considering that he folded to 4 3bets before he called this one and that he was izo raising, not opening (a bit tighter range).

• I'm thinking he can have AT, QQ, KQ and 55 that beat us (I put AK mostly in the turn betting range), maybe a T9s.
• What about the hands we beat and will call a bet? Maybe an AQ - If he bets it OTF and if he calls it OTR.

What do you think lIlCitanul about this range? Do you believe there is something I'm missing? Do you think AQ is in a high enough frequency there to vbet?

Seeing this I would not valuebet the river and funny enough, I might even consider a check/fold as we are very-very clear showdown value with the intention of check/calling the river so I doubt anything can bluff. Fortunatley AQ can valuebet and ofc I know that against a reg folding the very top of our range could be bad.

I think if villain was going to bluff it would be on the turn. Especially with such an aggression factor. Sample size is low though, as well as the fold to 3-bet stat.

So to me villains range has a lot of showdown, very few bluffs. Unless this guy is willing to bet a lot of missed flushdraws.
I get that when we jam all-in we are losing against KQ, KJ, QQ, JJ. But we are check/calling. So there is no difference vs those hands between bet all-in/check-call.
In that case we are asking ourselves how to maximize value from the other part of his range. My estimation would be that betting all in is higher EV as it's unlikely he will bluff on the river.

But then in comparison couldn't it be that the check/fold line is the highest EV of all? Coz he will checkback hands he would fold against a shove, we win against those just like when we shove (and the same goes for his occasional sd value).

This way we can say that shoving from our part only makes sense if when he calls we will win more than 50% of the time - like when examining if a vbet is really a vbet in a vacuum (as there are no other factors like he could makes us fold the better hand when checking etc, we can look at it just like that).

Good point.
Check-fold is 0 EV.
Check-call can be -EV if villain barely bluffs.
And bet All-in is -EV if we don't get called by worse often enough.

Could calculate breakpoints but might be the case yeah. Hard to say without stats.

Lot of useful thoughts in this discussion, thanks very much guys:)

Only size against a reg should be a shove

Well as you mentioned with many your comments, we usually arent incentivized to play gto.. the same goes with sizings.. I mean x/folding is a solid option, but I am bit afraid of getting bluffed with some PPs or anything since there is much higher chance based on his agg stats so far.. What about using smaller sizing? Get much thin value from AQ,AJ,QJ. Or are we afraid of getting bluffraised? I think its less probable outcome than if we would check and he bets..
From my observations, loose and more agg guys are also having trouble with folding rivers exploitatively. Still our spr is more than 1, I think there is some room for a smaller sizing.. I mean our range is also so well-protected by nutted hands, so that I wouldnt scared of getting bluff-raised.. And if we start to noticing this.. that he is playing back or aggro enough in this way, we can counter exploit him by start x/calling hands like this.
But as a default x/f seems a bit too assumptive vs potentially aggressive Villain.