I think the principles are universal: it's mostly about why the solver opts for one/multiple lines and how we can model our strategy according to what response we expect the population or specific player profiles to have.

If you're a low stakes player it's helpful to start developing some knowledge of critical/flexible thinking in poker, but your game will improve much more by working on high frequency spots and by developing a solid and sound fundamental strategy -playing good ABC poker is harder than it looks-.

To sum it up: yes, you can watch videos like this even if you play low stakes, not to replicate the same plays at your tables, but to understand what are some questions you need to ask yourself before deciding the action/when studying to be more efficient.

Thanks man!
Very solid advice. I will focus on the questions you ask in the video.
ABC poker is damn hard :(

3betting nut flushes is very ambitious and depends on villain (especially how thin they raise and how often they call with worse), but definitely you don't want to have As as a blocker, as his specific hand is one of my best candidate to 3b as a bluff.

SB is a recreational, maybe MP decided to flat to generete a multiway pot with the rec (I don't actually remember the rec's stats right now, it could be it was a whale).

In general we want to unblock the pairs KK-JJ and the high flushdraws that might take that line when we bluff the river.

I would only use b 150% or b200% on blank rivers; the overshove is better in a metagame where players like to do marginal calls, I expect this spot to be massively overfolded with overshoves. If you want to set up river all-ins it might be worth to consider a bigger size on the turn (2x pot or more), but in general I think these strategies incentivize massive overfolds (especially in the pocket pairs and weak Aces region) and more trapping strategies on the flop.

It's a spot where you want to be very polarized, as villain is not supposed to bet very often on the turn, due to the A being terrible for OOP's range -villain is more polar on turns like this-. Sizes are chosen according to how our range wants to play and they're a function of ranges that follow given actions and runouts. We might have a single hand class that wants to use a specific size, but that becomes very exploitable and it's not advised to go towards that route against a semi-competent/decent regular, while it's a perfectly legitimate play against weak players.

Ranges can be very different from how solver plays in such spots and even a half of a combo can make a huge difference between a valuebet/check. I would never use 1/3 here (we're not valuebetting QJ and AK), we can bet around half/66% pot against a recreational player, but not against reasonable regulars.

Even if we're good 95% of the time, why would we bet a hand which is never getting called by worse? I think QJ very likely is checking on the turn, or going for a smaller bet size and maybe a river block -a more sound strategy if villain wants to bet thinner from the turn-, the x/r, big bet, x/call sounds like a very -EV play with actual ranges.