I wouldn't mind xc ott since we're oop and flush could be in his range, that's a healthy bet he called otf and if u say he's good then he shouldn't be so loose with that call, maybe something such as sets, flush draws, AJ, I guess a few KJ although we have blockers so his range could be even narrowed to flush draws, maybe even something like QQ, perhaps a couple of under pairs such as TT/99 maybe 88. That being said I like even more the xc ott since there aren't a HUGE amount of worst hands he wants to keep calling with
as played I think we should be definitely checking otr I think even xf depending on his sizing since his range is pretty strong when he bets and I don't see that many bluff in it I actually don't see any bluff when we check otr and he bets strong

More pre (closer to 4x) oop w this hand and deep stacks
Rest seems fine and I'd shove river for value quite happily

How wide v opens and Defends vs 3bs matters some but certainly would be happy shoving otr - he has plenty of worse hands to call
Sure some draws got there but I'm pretty sure his range won't have enough better hands to make me really concerned about folding otr
I may check this out w software but my intuition tells me that he has way less flushes and straights than u think

math is off by $100

you can't xf this river when you dominate a solid chunk of his vbets + you outlined him as highly capable of targeting you with aggression.

if he's not Vbetting QJ and sets here, your river checking range is almost definitely too strong. You'd be sacrificing value to check JJ if he can't vbet 2pair+. Also he'd be getting to free showdown way too often with 1 pair hands after b-b-x, since you would barely be vbetting river in a model where he can't bet 2pair+ when checked to (b/c so many of your sets+ would need to be in your b-b-x line in order for him to not have incentive to bet QJ+ on the end).

i dont disagree with your choice based on those assumptions. i think your assumptions are really bias though, especially after you labeled this guy aggro in the OP. He'll have a river bluffing frequency, and his dominated sets are a slam dunk bet. That alone makes it a clear call after checking river.

I think he could value bet all his 2 pair+ once you checked river. You probably go b/b/b with your flushes so once you check he can safely bet his QJ or sets. Thinking you still have a lot of AA/KK/AK/AQ in your range. He can also put a ton of pressure on you with A/K of diamonds. I think there are a lot of 1 pair/float hands that have just one diamond in them that continued on the turn but now have to bluff river. And as you said, this villain is capable.

So I think c/c is better than b/f. Against most live villains I don't think folding is a mistake but against the player bio you gave I think it is.

ideally is it possible to read someone accurately enough to check fold the turn to a flush bet?

even if he had a flush 100% of the time when betting turn, you still have implieds to xc JJJ at this depth.

If the guy just see you like a solid tight player, i would expect him to pretty straight forward against you, he just has the flush 100% of the time here.
And against good regular we obv can't fold here give that we beat all 2 pairs sets and double float.

I put this hand in PIO. here are the notable takeaways:

OTT: oop barrels turn 3% of the time. always checks JJ. vbets shreds of AA-QQ, flushes. This is a drastic checking adjustment from the 100bb version of this model, where OOP barrels turn 35% of the time.

OTR: oop barrels 64%. when he checks, he xc's 40% vs a slight overbet jam (only sizing i allowed for IP).

IP bets when checked to OTR 49% of the time for the slight overbet sizing. QJ is the weakest hand he v-bets.

id be very interested as to what crev or similar software thinks his range is comprised of here otr
% of flushes/straights/1p hands etc

Nick Howard wrote: "This is a drastic checking adjustment from the 100bb version of this model,"

Nick, this seems to indicate that the deeper the stacks are, the more you have to protect your stack against the opponent having the nuts?

Would that be a reasonable conclusion from PIO ?

which

Reading the hands you post OP, I really really think you should not sit in with 200bb but rather with 50 to 80. It doesn't seem you adjust well to deeper stack sizes IMHO.

Mistakes I see in this hand: the 3b sizing preflop. You should absolutely go bigger, or you should flat. I'm pretty sure your range from BB in this spot is very straightforward / value oriented and that's not good. That makes it easy for the player IP to put you on a defined range in 3b pot (and big implieds to stack you), that also makes it easy when you flat the raise as you're capped. Personnally when CO opens big like that and we get to be HU if I flat my BB, then I'll usually flat the range I want to VPIP, including JJ, AK, AA. If he opens smaller or if another player calls, then sure I have a squeeze range.
Anyway 3betting preflop the way you seem to play is very faced up, and making it 120 is begging for trouble, as vilain will always call, will have position and a wide range versus your defined range. Easy strategic situation for him, tough one for you. It's important you understand how actions can put you in good spots or in bad spots ; any action at the table has an influence.

Postflop, yeah Cbet is good, but turn is definitely a check ; your range is pretty capped here, with top set obv being the top (exception made of AdKd right).
Weirdly enough, I think as played you have a value bet river because vilain can totally level himself thinking you are bluffing here when you 3barrel, as it seems dubious you'd 3barrel value AA with your image for instance.

NB: I'm absolutely not bashing here, that is not my goal. I'm merely expressing what seems right for me in that spot, knowing I am biased. But you post a lot, so you're trying to work on your game right? Probably good to conflict opinions then.

As I said, you're probably face up in your range, you seem to be the kind of player who would 3b TT+ / AQ here, and not much else. So by 3betting so small, you let vilain IP great odds to outplay you, and also great implied odds to hit something. Obv, I don't know your exact range, but I've read most of the hands you've posted, and that's just my 'idea of you', my 'read' if you prefer.

Don't think it's a good strategic situation to:
- be in a big pot OOP, being deep
- having a very defined range
- facing a decent player who could use his position correctly enough by: not paying off badly / bluffing when the situation is appropriate / value town you when you can't fold an overpair type hand.

Think about it: poker is war, a war of decision-making and a war of information. Don't see how you've put yourself in a profitable situation here. Vilain kind of knows what you have, you have no clue what he has, he gets to act behind, and there is lot of money behind, lot of room for further mistakes.

The deeper you are, the more mixing up and confusing opposition becomes key. And using stack leverage as well. Again, it's a subjective read of mine, but nothing in the hands you're posting shows me that you would play your hands differently 200bb deep from being 50bb deep for instance. Even the contrary, it seems to me you would be easy to play deep, at least I would target you @ a typical US 5/10. BTW, I think it's a common mistake. Many people don't master deep play at all. But they still sit deep, so for me it's a goldmine.

It's all about your range. If you 3bet a wide and merged range in that spot, sure 120 is a good sizing. if you 3b polarized / value-oriented and small, I dislike it. BTW, you never 'have to stack off if you don't want to'. You're the only master of your decision-making at the table. But if really your concern is not to stack off marginally postflop for 200bb with JJ, then why not just flat and have a strong, somewhat disguised hand?

Hum sorry I didn't understand everything Which. Didn't understand this:

I would guess that the sizing should be scaled based on stack sizes, where in an uncapped game such as Golden Nugget 1/2 game (yes $1 small blind) it might be possible to see situations where it is never correct to 3 bet?
And the never 3 betting does not add in the complexity of being 200 bb deep vs the villain, but having small stacks still left to act.

What you say about merged vs polarized raise when 100bb deep seems correct to me, in a general sense. Indeed, it doesn't mean that when we are 200bb deep we should just double our size. It's more complex than that, as hand value changes a lot when stack sizes change, something tournament players are very accustomed to... In cash game, when you start to get beyond 200bb deep, pairs and suited aces become extra valuable as compared to offsuit broadways and strong Ax (AJo/ AQo become more marginal 3b for value, as they can easily be in more trouble postflop when very deep). So it's not only about sizing, it's def about what hands you choose to play.

Adding to that, I guess my point is about 'what makes money' in poker, and esp in deep cash game. IMHO, deception is super important the deeper you are. You need to create mistakes for a lot of big blinds postflop, that's kind of the game deep stacked. The way I view it: deep-stacked cash game allows for more leverage play. Because of that leverage aspect, being IP is super valuable. Being disguised / balanced is also super important. Here, the mistake I see with 3betting, and that's a common mistake for TAG players (esp americans) would be to 3b JJ and AK, but flat 66 and also flat 87s and A8s, etc. They wouldn't 3b AJo for value versus a loose CO (arguably, that's dangerous to 3b that hand when deep) ; they wouldn't 3b 53s either, almost ever.
They wouldn't flat JJ, or AA, or AK, versus the 4bb open. So basically, when a TAG player fitting that category flats, I know what he has. I'll know which board to put max pressure. I'll know which board to procede with caution. All that with initiative and position, and chips behind.
When he 3b, I know what he has. It's easy for me not to pay off his value bets. It's easy for me to bluff some runouts, it's also easy for me to value bet huge because I know what he has, and he can only guess what I have. And I only have to call 8bb into 17bb to get in that situation. That's a great proposition for a player like me. Implied odds! (implied odds are not only about hitting cards, but also the 'implied value' of getting in a given situation... for instance scared cards that we can effectively bluff, that could be a 'shadow out').

Because of all that, when I'm playing versus competent regs, either I'll mix up calling and 3betting a lot ; or I'll just flat everything when he opens 4x. That's because we're in a heads-up situation, we're in the BB and will close the action. So we know that if we VPIP, we have to be HU OOP and deep. Seems to me that we defend quite well, and provoke more mistakes, by just flatting the range we want to play, and then by playing clever postflop (developping a donking game, maybe a check-raise game, anybody can be creative with that). Example: if we were 100bb deep and CO opens 4x, I would love to flat my premiums and get more value post, for instance by check-calling flop and check-jamming turn on some boards, esp if my image allows me to get paid off light.
DegreesOfFreedom: you say you don't want to flat JJ because then overs will come. Realize that it's also true when you 3b..... Also, there is value in having a strong bluffcatcher with which you can easily check/call one or two streets on many many boards. By flatting, you get to call some bluffs or worse value hands than yours. There is value in 3betting, there is value in 'trapping' also, so to speak.

To sum up again: IMO deep-stacked poker is really about maximizing your value and decision-making on LATER streets. Sure, you have value in 3betting JJ BB vs CO. Sure you have value in c-betting KK on drawy board. BUT, you have to take into account your whole stack. This is why not being easily read on earlier streets is of paramount importance in deep stacked poker. Some players will get crazy aggressive when you look capped. Usually they're right because people don't balance well enough...