Both are 100% cbet flops for OOP

Does it also apply in the case of sb/utg where are ranges pretty narrow?

BTW: from my experience PIO doesnt cbet 100% of range in this situations. Where can I make mistake?
Thanks!

100% CB is sizing dependent, yes we have a very high volume of CB (i.e: sizing * frequency will be high) but you can just pick a big enough sizing that eventually you'll start developing a checking range (and conversely on "polar boards" you can often pick a small enough sizing that we stop checking). I think this can be a leak for some players where they range bet a board so they learn the response to a range bet but don't understand that some players are going to polarise here, some will do it well and you need to respond properly and some will do it poorly and you want to understand how they're likely deviating and what you can do to take advantage of this. I know this kind of sounds like semantics but you don't want your strategy to be dependent on your villain sticking to a rigid framework.

Does it also apply in the case of sb/utg where are ranges pretty narrow?

Yeah, they're still high-frequency cbet flops, but you have to slow down more OTT and OTR vs UTG because UTG has lot's of AKo and more high pairs. UTG range also has a higher fraction of K containing hands and pocket pairs. The flops are maybe more like 80%-90% cbet for GTO but it's not losing any EV to cbet 100% of the time.

DNegs98 Good points, and yes the flops aren't necessarily 100% cbet spots. My wording was definitely strong to say that basing on GTO is odd to look for. The main point I tried to make was that it is fairly frequent to see people deviating substantially from GTO when checking these boards. Some players are checking overly strong, others too skewed towards medium SD hands (hands like underpairs on K72 and AK on 223) and there are probably a decent amount of people being more balanced. Not sure how common it is to have too much trash in checking range and XF these flops too often tho.

1/3 with what frequency? are you able to stab 100% here?

id bet hands with BD potential, and then PP's that hold BDFD potential, and then check back combos with out. Think this naturally lets us randomize, and also blocks Axcc combos that may want to go for a check raise. I'd check back some complete air and determine whether or not to turn into bluff based on card that rolls off. Like QThh may want to turn into bluff on a J turn for example. I'd balance this with some of my low PP that check back flop(club absent)

id bet hands with BD potential

It's a very reasonable way to approach it. The only downside is if the villain is playing a high XR and low call strategy, but we can't be sure if he's doing so or not. That will make you bet/fold your best better bluffs instead of your worse bluffs.

A downside to this strategy is when you run into the "almost-range-bettor" who bets their entire range except sdv that they almost always x/c which is definitely a player archetype you'll find, against them betting small doesn't really get you anywhere. You'll also run into as mentioned the player who anticipates an over stab for protection and plays a very aggressive x/r strategy to counter this (which I think you'll see from a lot of strong regs countering population tendency). Doesn't necessarily make it wrong but I just want to point out that having a blanket response may lead to you accidentally exploiting yourself against certain player types.

Thanks for the replies. I suppose this is just my default line of reasoning without information on tendencies. If I thought that villains were checking to raise alot, that would definitely alter my decisions and probably cause me to check behind more frequent...

It sounds like y'all have a different line of reasoning here, care to expand?

Sorry, I just have too little to do these corona times :)

3bet pots IP it's in some situations correct to bluff more often without a backdoor than with the backdoor. I believe the reason is low SPR and high XR (SPR and XR correlate too). There is less upside to start building a big pot with a BDFD at SPR 4 and you fold more equity when facing a XR.

It's not like you never bet them or anything, and it's good to bet the higher equity ones more often if villain doesn't XR enough or you can easily continue the backdoor against a XR.

I'll have to pay attention how much I am getting XR.