Thanks Soundspeed, really appreciate the question! Both players have 5x in headsup, because there are simply more offsuit 5x played (K5o,A5o,65o,75o,54o at a minimum).

I don't think betting here is a big EV error, but I do think always betting the few nut combos here while checking the rest can create some exploitable imbalances on the checking range.

You basically always want the backdoor flush draw, because your pair outs are higher ev (hitting the flush completing pair is quite low value) and you also suck out on nut hands more (that 4% backdoor flush is quite a bit of equity against a set).

Thanks 777!

This QJ combo has quite a few viable lines and should be used in most of them, to keep your opponent off-center. We could use the double minraise to penalize his airballs and weaker hands. We could also use a check-call line to hopefully induce him to bluff and value bet wider (assuming that I always have a T or 6). They all have some utility so I don't a strong preference between them.

I think that's the idea is that you block most of the calling range and it's also a very low frequency checkraise combo so combining those two things -- the solver always prefers XAI with combos that block calls and don't occur very often in the range. Which would seem to make this a slam dunk. I don't know in practice how well it works, becasue this scenario is quite unusual and I don't have MDA for it.

Thanks Truepower!

There's basically going to be 2 sizings here. Either a small block to try to get that last dribble of value out of underpairs with Tx or a bigger sizing repping 5x+. The actual question here condenses down to how much weakness the small bet is viewed with.

if you do flat turn

You don't need to try and win every hand by hero calling king high. Keep in mind the this is $5/$10. Still a $53 bet and unlikely to give up on the river unless its a 6 or 5. Low stakes more likely to give up but high stake players are going to go for it more often than not.

yes but also HU so ranges super wide

It's fun to see holecards, but equity ultimately makes our decisions. And we do not have enough equity with K2o to continue even if 65o is pure bet here.

I had a look at this hand in the solver, because I was curious as to whether betting turn with 65 was a mistake.

The solver will basically pure bet it with a heart, and check without. The other suits block more of the weak back-door hands like 86ss, 86cc, 86dd, 85ss, 85cc, 85dd.

65 can also bet-call the turn here for close to 2bb in EV too, so you are not folding a bunch of equity if you get raised.

Also, I feel like in general, betting here out-performs compared to the EV generated in the solver. In most of these scenarios the small bet usually garners more folds from humans than it would from a solver I think? Not sure about on this specific board-pairing turn as OOP might check a lot more strong hands than usual.

matlittle I think for many years I would agree with your analysis, but the prevalence of both RTA and easily available solutions on very common node, I don't think that it's as likely to be clearly always a bet.

matlittle thanks for the screen shot. Betting 6h5x 6x5h here makes a lot of sense as OOP will XR-X with a lot of bdfd and having a rainbow turn unblocking all the XR-XF hands where they don't pick up equity is a simple heuristic. IP usually barrels the turn suit unblocking bdfd that XC-XF so vs XR-X it appears to be the same. If Tyler played XC-X I'm sure having a heart on the turn with your OESD is best with both lines.

You definitely could checkraise to 2e and then jam river. It's a bit tricky because his range I believe here is actually kind of weak with our card-removal so we are going to a big overfold, no matter what action sequence we take.