20:50 Q8dd:
When playing a polarised cbet strategy on a flop like this our betting range revolves so heavily around protection oriented value betting that on the Kx turn our most frequent delay sizing will want to be large as opposed to small (we dont have hands that benefit much from denying equity/getting thin value - they mostly bet flop).

Additionally, "Villain gonna check a lot on K/A to us" = we are playing vs a strong range on a board with tonnes of live equity (double FD) in a spot where we have removed a lot of nutted combos from our own range and most of our betting range is 1P centric. When we are IP in this scenario we will be playing polarised because our range has the option of xb for free with a lot of hands that will suffer from an aggrssive xr strategy of OOP and can showdown for a decent amount of EV.

Whilst its true that OOP has a number of weak hands that will likely fold to a turn block bet, as a part of our overall strategy it doesnt make a tonne of sense to use it as a high frequency sizing for us on the turn.

29:40 55:
Its definitely close, but were you to model this in a solver vs a 1-3% RFI range that the CO is certainly playing (due to sample we can know this) it will likely find the fold. Take into account that imo population will not adjust enough to this factor and squeeze a similar range to what they would usually play in retrospect I'm still fairly happy to make a fold here.

32min 66:

This board texture is definitely one of the worst for us BUvsBB, and we need to be very careful with our flop betting range. I think all sets on this flop will do some xb but 66 will cbet most frequently - it wouldnt be a mistake obviously if you just blindly cbet all of them. There are a couple of gameplan deviations we are able to make here if you do some solver investigative study which I think works well exploitatively against certain groups of population (think about how different players will play turns vs our cbet/skip cbet range etc). This is partly why I chose to elect to xb 66 here

Its a board with tonnes of live equity for both players and so I believe our bluffs will come from equitable hands that block IPs continuing range i.e having club is important and choosing draws that lose the least by xr'ing vs xc. What I mean by this is that there are a bunch of draws that have profitable xc's E.g KQo/A4 etc whereas a hand like 76cx is not as profitable a call and may instead xr at a frequency since it is not sacrificing much EV of its call. I think ultimately we will find a mixture of bluffs since the board is very changeable on many rivers and we want to have coverage/bluffs to balance value on different cards

We may also find some bluffs from hands such as 3x that is a low ev turn call but can get some of IPs better hands to fold as well as blocking the top of their range and unblocking bluffs. This is slightly less likely though imo because of the availability of bluffs with equity/outs/implied odds

Wasn't me unfortunately!