Well if villain folds to 3bets too much and 4bets KK+ only (doesnt 4bet bluff), AK can be too good to waste on a bluff.

I thought about this for a while and no. Im still taking EV of 3betting over EV of calling, even under these conditions.

And what about an EV of both? I mean you can always 3bet a different hand.

"Raise on the flop is likely an overplay of your hand 3way with a UTG range in there."
so do you just call OTF when BB is a fish, and you UTG folds?

It's not strong enough to XR flop then bet turn and river unimproved. I think there are some merit to XR flop and check call turn with AK, but I prefer to have a FD or BDFD in that line.

To be honest, for me it's really astonishing what you wrote.
Since fish's range contains a lot of Ax, draws or any other trash I think villain has super +ev x/r on this texture, and if there's no club on this board I'm very happy pushing my all chips with TPTK OTR against NL5 fish ;)

Problem is that by x/r we are basically pumping a lot of money into the spot where:
- we cant do anything else than ch/f turn/river at clubs (so almost 40% of time)
- 3 and 4 runouts are also bad versus wide BB range,
- Q/J/T are also not great and on double broadway runout we're also no longer in good spot,
- we still are behind versus solid amount of his two pairs/34

Raising verus range looks really good OTF, but then you realize, that without any additonal good cards, with 2 more streets, you basically hate the world on most runouts.

I wouldn't be trying to play a MW pot opp here fish or not inSB.

@Scream that's a good answer - clue about x/f 40% of time. But imo we should still remember that we are playing against NL5 fish :)

It's a close spot and depends on assumptions. I probably put more weight on the pot being MW with UTG and less on him being a fish. If you XR AK or not here, will not make or break your win rate either.

No need to defend our view points more because it's pointless. I welcome all kinds of feedback but using words like "really astonishing" is not conducive to making a discussion rational and objective. What I write is only my estimations of how to play, so I use words as "likely" to emphasize the inherent uncertainty of what the best play actually is. I don't want to spend time on quantifying the spot because it's close to irrelevant for my win rate, but if it was more important I would make simulations with different assumptions and not engage in a long qualitative debate.

I didnt want to offend you. I'm sorry if you feel that I did that. Probably that's because of language barriers.
regards :)