It's kind of hard for me to estimate the importance of things like this, and for a while I was skeptical of the need for them as well. The solvers seem to suggest that in a lot of spots, I wasn't cbetting enough of a distribution of pairs (too many top pairs, not enough weaker pairs), so I've tried to adapt my strategy closer to that in ways that make sense to me.

3betting the river within my range that chose to lead out for 3/4 pot is going to be very uncommon, although perhaps it needs to be a bigger concern now that I know how Ben chose to play this spot. I'd very likely be representing some hands like 77 or the occasional big flush, but without the nut blocker I don't think I'll be choosing an allin size here. I think I'd end up sizing something like 3.8k, which should make sense for the equity of 777 vs his likely range and avoid overplaying if he ever has the nut flush.

yeah I have the same question, its a spot where IP is almost always capped to less than Tx boats so is it reasonable for Hero to set up a xr range with some of our Tx?

xr is a reasonable option here and probably one I under utilize. I think the very likely play for his Tx or some random 9x hands is to bxb, so having a large sizing xr range is logical for me. I wouldn't say he's capped in the sense that there's no protection concerns with quads and he could easily check behind some % of the time if he thought it was beneficial. I could still probably size quite big here on an xr since he's going to be firing often enough, given his overpair advantage with TT-AA.

I think we want to xr with hands that have two kickers which will well represent our most common 5x combos that flat preflop 100% (like Q5o-A5o, 56o). Sounds like this would've been a nice xr combo based on my own analysis here, as would K6, while A6 might just be strong enough to xc.