I will give it a try. Do we take

1. SB has a range advantage I suppose as MP presumably has more high card combos in his PFR range and SB can overcall with more speculative hands.

2. Pure guessing Top 15%.

3. Any 87xx, sets with high flushdraws, Nut flushdraws with straight blockers or 89.

4.Betting: Any 87xx, sets with high flushdraws, Nut flushdraws with straight blockers or 89. Good nut blocker hands with some EQ. X/calling, top2, sets, some high flushdraws with little overpairs. X/raising are really tough to construct in mulitway deep spots in a sandwich position, The merit of having one is rather marginal here.

1. Similar to 4.

2. Probably top 2-5% when we raise many 87 OTF.

3. This hand exploitativly. Some nut flushdraws maybe. J doesnt really help our range at all and not much value in leading out here if we cannot represent any hits and the rest of your range make good bluffcatchers.

4. Bet decent double fds, high heart draws, 87, some sets for protection. Really strong blocker hands like 77/ 88

5. call nut flushdraws, sets, x/raise none but this pariticular hand.

6. I prefer bigger bets for a more polarized range on super connected boards.

7. No

8. X/raise. I hardly disbelief villain to only half pot with 87 twice on this board texture and I delete 23 completly as a possible hand. We should have great implied odds against given the nuttyness of our draws against the current nuts, but we are OOP and villain will be able to check behind a lot on pairing or flushing rivers., unless he fills up himself.
   I also dont think villain has that many pure Q high K high flushdraws in his turn betting range. Realizing EQ IP is preferable in his shoes. Against them calling would be better as we can bluffcatch easily on blanks and x/raise on hearts.

In multiway flops, I highly prefer leading with the nuts and some strong draws for balance. Reason: ppl will have stronger and narrower betting ranges in multies, at least they should so I cannot get in as many flop raises as I would like. 2nd, my x/raises look even stronger, my villains can play pretty much perfectly against them and i find it easier to vary my betting ranges when i have a leading range.

"I will call the flop lead and bluff on any flush or board pairing turn or river." this is hardly possible as MP because the btn still has yet to act. MP is handcuffed given btn protects SB just by being IP, no matter what his range looks like. MP cannot call with too much and bluff flushing turns. I see no hand MP can call against a lead that a) doesnt improve on flushcards and therefor isnt bluffing b) has enough sdv bluffcatch potential not to want to bluff it, unless you start turning sets into a bluff on flushboards. Only options would be weaker flushes.

Yet an adjustment against a floating strategy would be to x/call or x/raise some nutflushes or fulls, but only if a certain tendency is visible, not as vacuum / standard game plan.

Alright, not seeing a ton of action on this thread. Maybe this is too difficult? Or too easy? Or we're keeping basic range thoughts secret? Or perhaps we don't like quizzes? I'll start by answering a cpl questions myself, and see how things go.

For #3 and #7, regarding SB leading ranges on flop and turn, to me it doesn't make sense. There's no particular range reason to have a flop leading range, and the turn card doesn't really shift range distributions significantly. It does even them out a bit, and makes for interesting rivers, but doesn't really justify a leading range.

Oh, and maybe a small hint: We're dealing with largely symmetric ranges here, both on the flop and the turn.

*I have a very hard time trying to get the formatting to work in this forum given I wrote this out on a word file before this. If I space every certain line like I intended it to be the numbers would all be mess up for some reason. Sorry for that, its alittle hard to read. But it is what it is.

Range construction (going to use PJ ranges)
MP: $FI15
BB: $FI20!$3B6I
SB: $FI15!$3B4O
1. Range equity on flop
SB: 33%
MP: 35%
BTN 32%
2.

I ran SB range vs MP range on PPT.
Our specific hand have 64% equity against MP entire range. Which mean we are at about the top 15% of hands in our range vs MP.
3. I actually think vs good players that are capable of bluff raising blockers/air/draws and will bet when check to themselves to steal a high % of the time we shouldn’t have any leading range here.
Against weaker calling station type players that will call their weak draws we want to donk for value because they will check back too often and we have good FE against their air range.
4. I would think MP cbetting range should be very polarize 3 ways on this flop so I am very confuse at the choice of a ½ pot bet sizing.
I would think such a small sizing would be to exploit opponents when you have a nut+nut hand like 87** with the Ahh but since we have Ahh he cant have that which makes it very puzzling.

Another way of looking at it is if MP’s range is actually not polarize here and he is betting for thin value. And that will be the way I construct his range. It will be too complicated to create two strategies where villain bets full pot with a sub range and ½ pot with another sub range so I will also assume he bets ½ pot with his whole range here.
MP Range Distribution

Assuming he will be betting quite thin for value here,
Betting range: #A,#E,#F
Check Raising range: (#B,#C):Ahh and some 44+:hh from #A range
Check calling: #B,#C (without the NFD) and #D
We could split #A range out alittle and place it in our c/r and c/c range too but its alittle hard to do in PJ as we are running out of space.
Check folding: #G
5. SB range distribution

SB strategy should be a reaction to MP’s strategy so the equity you see on top of the bar graph is sub range vs MP’s betting range.
Interestingly even against a thin value betting range our 32,37 only have 48% equity against villain range so we wont be raising these hands.
Check/raise: #A (we will randomly be slowplaying #A:ss which is 1.88% of range),#C and #F(don’t need to raise all of #F)
Check/call: #B,#D,#E,#G,#A:ss
Check/fold: #H
6.
SB Range: $FI15!$3B4O:(32,37,45,46,56,44,55,(86,85,84,76,75,74)!(87,73,32),JJ:(Qhh,Khh,Ahh),QQ:(Qhh,Khh,Ahh),K:(Qhh,Khh,Ahh),AA:(Qhh,Khh,Ahh))
MP Range: $FI20:(32,37,78,45,46,56,44,55,66,88,77,8:hh,7:hh)
This range is a pain in the arse to input in PPT and I might have gotten it wrong so double check if you really want to make sure.

We have 65% equity vs villains range here so about top 25% of hands.
7. NO turn leading range. We don’t have enough 87 and villain range is ahead.
8. MP turn range distribution
MP should be 2barrel often here:

Betting range: #A,#B,#D,#E (about ½ of #E)
Checking back: #C (because this hands do not want to get check/raise), Remaing of #E range.
I cant quite make up my mind about 44+ without flush draws but I do think we want to bet for protection against SB range that is heavy in FD and SD.
While 45+ without flushdraws are just bet/folding trying to deny opponents equity and folding since we are far behind a stack off range.
9. SB turn range distribution

Given turn SPR of 4.6 we wont be check/raise bluffing here. But we will have some semi-bluffs.
Check/Raise: #A,#B, some #E/#F.
Check/Call: #C,#D,#G, and the remaining of #E,#F that we didn’t raise.
The reason we have some semi-bluff with the bottom of our calling range is to make villain indifferent with his non-nut hands. Against opponents that wont notice and stack off anyway we will wont be semi-bluffing here but calling with those hands.
Check/fold #H
We are check/calling a lot and it would seem that on blank rivers we will have a tough time c/c but I think that is just how c/c vs barrelling ranges work. I might be wrong and we shld be slowplaying more but I don’t see a point doing tt being 4.6 SPR.
10. I would have a more polarizing bet sizing and ranges.
11. After doing the range analysis I think a ½ pot bet sizing can work here but it does put you into tougher spots vs a check/raise since you have weaker made hands. But if you have good reads on opponents raising frequency and ranges it will work.
12. SB actual hand equity vs MP’s turn range

Assume MP is stacking off with #A,#B,#C.
This is a tough decision and I keep going back and forth with it trying to analyse different river scenarios.
The only way to figure this out is to analysis all river scenario but who have the time for that. So I will make some really general assumptions to analyse river play to determine turn play.
I have done some river analysis but wont go into detail because of how complicated the calculation could be and the amount of assumptions it takes. But I did conclude check/raising here is more +EV than check calling and playing a river.
13. Too much too say here. Lets explore what range imbalances our opponent can have.
1. Too nut heavy
2. Too bluff heavy
3. Too medium str heavy
Against (1), we wld be folding our 2nd/3rd straight at some point if not the flop. Our draws are more valuable here and we probably should be slow playing more.
Against (2), we can check/raise light semi-bluff more. We get fold equity and at the same time protect our equity against his bluffs.
Against (3) which is our opponent here (given the ranges I made up), as you can see I constructed the flop raising range to be strong with nuts and strong semi bluff that are dominating our opponent range and some weak bluff blocker hands. We will be bluff catching lighter too the river because of MPs wide value range, our non-nut straights and sets have more value.
That was a long post, thanks for the quiz. Hope this answer is reasonable and I like to hear any criticism on it. Cheers.

This is gonna be fun when I have time for it.