Thanks SoundSpeed, really appreciate your excellent question and comments.

He should not have many blocks IP here at all and the main value lines are going to be around 125% of pot here. Sometimes players think that people overfold to small bets so they start to post-oak bluff.

OOP is very different because blocking Qx is now considered equal or better than checking, because the IP player can bet.

I think the jam with Ad8s is sloppy because it's hard to overbluff these nodes, because I have so many flushes and the Ad actually blocks some of my semibluffs (which should make it worse).

On Js5d2d6c, the solver likes to center betsizes slightly over pot again. Overpairs are good here around 90% of the time on the turn so we can big bet them.

Thanks! Sometimes it's a cat and mouse of game of adjustments in these games.

Yes, we'd jam every non-T, not 6, non Ace river. Just like we would with our fullhouses.

Thanks 777! I really appreciate the love.

It can do well with both, if the fold frequencies get above 50% then checkraising draws is more profitable than calling. Against other player types though that overcall we should only do checkraise turn with value.

Thanks it looks a little odd, but I think is squarely profitable against most players because they tend not to value these spots too thinly and they bluff too widely.

Thanks Hunter!

Definitely a possibility that it's a bot and it's very possible that in MDA on this board people overfold to 1/3rd. I need to defend around 75% of range which possibly includes some Ax or 22.

I look at the at the 67% pot size flop bet. When I look at 1/3rd potsize, I get 82% call and 18% Fold with AKo to the turn checkraise. My primary point here was to stress that calling regions on flush-boards are narrower than most people are used to.

Thank you, Matt! As usual, you raise a very valid point that the solver doesn't raise T6s on this turn. I checked some rivers and T6dd varies between call/raise/fold based on the river card so the solver is thinking much more deeply on this board than the generalized heuristic.

I'd argue that the range is generally A9+ with a bias toward overpairs and bluffs. People actually will fold overpairs to this jam with the extra value combos coming in, so I'm really hypothesizing that my opponent doesn't call one pair much to the jam. On reflection, I am not sure that was a terribly strong hypothesis.

That's an interesting idea! I checked the solver, and the EV of call/jam is almost identical. If you nodelock in some more folds with overpairs then the solver will just jam the T6cc. So you are definitely onto something. If we also factor in that we are unlikely to be able to play the river as well as the solver will (especially OOP), then it's probably higher EV for us humans to jam than call. The one thing that leaves me hesitant to try this play still though is the MDA data that says that the average reg in my games will just have more strong hands getting to this node to start with because weak regs take this bet sizing sequence more frequently with strong hands and use smaller sizings with bluffs. I will definitely look for more of this type of play vs good aggressive regs though!

I actually think the player type who both overbets overpairs and then folds to jam is pretty common, because it does very well against a lot lower stake recreationals and regs.