NutCr4cker

They don't exist in HM2 and prob they won't be adding any stats anymore since I would guess they are focusing on HM3. Options are Notecaddy, H2N or waiting if they'll make those stats for HM3.

I would go with Monker. It's basicly Multiway version of Pio with less practical interface.

Question #1:
If you are betting OTR with a perfectly polarized and balanced range, you are making your opponent indifferent for calling or folding his/her bluffcatchers (which are 100% of his range in this case I assume) and all of your opponent's bluffcatchers are 0 EV calls (and 0 EV when folding). If your opponent is folding more than 1-A, your best response to his strategy is to start bluffing more than the perfectly balanced range allows you since your opponent is deviating from the equalibrium and is exposed to exploiting, which you should be doing then. Same goes when your opponent starts calling with all of his bluffcatcher, which really likely would mean that he is calling way more than 1-A: you can start adjusting and bluff less.

Playing "GTO" is the way to go when making sure no one can exploit you but in most cases it's not the most +EV strategy to choose since very few players are actually playing GTO and thus you increase your EV by deviating from GTO and exploit your opponent's tendencies.

Question #2:
Let's put it this way: does your EV change if you play the same range vs
a) 1% 3 betting range
b) 100% 3 betting range?
Yeah, your EV does change and it's going up. Poker being zero-sum game, one player's increased EV can't come anywhere else than from the opponent's EV.

Should you always stick to the same defending range in a) and b) ? No, you shouldn't. Ofcourse you can and many times you should stick to your predefined ranges untill you have more information about your opponent's tendencies and then you can again start to adjust and deviate from your previous strategy to the proper direction.

I'm not sure did I answer to your questions but hope these 2 cents help.

Betting small with really wide range isn't theoretically correct bc our betsize should determine how many bluffs we can have, but in practice it's really effective on dry boards where we r basicly making the villain call with a super wide range and facing double/triple barrels and/or x/calling turn/river w good bluffcatcher when villain has really wide flouting range. And obv if villain doesn't float our small sizing wide enough, we r gaining EV by him folding too much and that's basicly the reasoning for betting small IMO.

+1 to thereheis. When solver says we should bet AQdd/AQcc 90% it implicates that the EV(bet[AQdd/AQcc]) = EV(check(AQdd/AQcc]) or atleast those EV's are very close to equal. If they'r EV's is unequal, it would say that we should either bet or check 100% of the time whichever EV is higher for us. And that's excatly the case with AQhh: EV of checking AQhh is higher than betting it and that must be bc of blocker effect.