Hey, thanks :)
Second hand - OOP kinda needs some XR or else IP gets to have an even higher bet frequency, also SPR is low enough that if he has strat involving mostly XR nut flush he doesnt really get additionally penalised for it on riv bc either way IP is betting vast majority of their flushes (so OOP capped doesnt really mean IP gets to expand value range) and OOP can just call off most of his own flushes vs jam either way. As for rivs when turn goes X/B/C, pretty sure that the only rivs he has any leads on are the board pairs, and I'd assume his bluffs kinda have to be whichever 2prs get devalued by the riv (so 32 on a J, J2 on a 5 type of thing).

From memory, the reason IP was betting so much of their range, besides their significant nut advantage, was that their non flush stuff gained from denying equity to some of OOPs weaker flop XRs (ie making an open ender fold when we happen to have 2pr/set). I think vs <20% those hands just start to pure continue (and at a price where we dont really extract value from them doing so) so my guess would be that anything in the 20-30% region would be the preferred sizing if we hypothetically gave the solver an extensive range of options. To your specific question, no, I've never run sims with sizings that small, although I have sometimes thought that theres no particular reason why monker wouldnt use them in certain cases, so if we tweaked the particulars of this spot (lower nut advantage for IP such that b25% was lower, for example) I could maybe see them getting some use. Its worth considering, though, that the solver will play perfectly vs an extremely small bet, whereas most humans wont, so even if the solver ignores those sizings that doesnt mean they wouldnt work well in practice.

I think population is actually likely to play better versus a small bet in this spot. A smaller bet takes the pressure of the hands we want to be pushing towards indifference and leverages the spr significantly worse as well.

I think we have to be careful making "cutsie" bets in spots that our we gain a significant range advantage IP and are facing essentially a pure checking range to not make villains continues too easy thus almost counteracting our advantage.

I think that most populations in most MTT scenarios are 4betting a range thats not only tighter but also quite a bit more linear, but earlyish in a high buyin tough field event I think ppl are a lot closer to "correct" than they were at the start of the year.

Pt2 - I decided that whilst this was pretty decent content, I couldnt run two ongoing MTT series and still claim to be responsive to viewer feedback which was heavily in favour of cash game content, so I mentally shelved it. I have a decent amount of hands from similar events I could use in the future once the SCOOP series is finished.