TheRedPillx

There are many options: GTO Wizard, GTOx, Poker Scientist are few of the available options.
Unfortunately, from my knowledge, they are independent companies and can't be bought through RIO

Mandatory TURN bet, it's one of the best cards for our range. If you don't bet top of your range, what are you even betting, IP ?
When we are IP, we are allowed to bet wider flop/turn since we always have the option to X back the next street.

River, mandatory raise. Even the board blocks itself, in a way. He has only 1 combo of A8s, 1 of A7s and 2 combos of A4s. Sets are unlikely since he should bet those on previous streets.

I would bet flop for 40%-60% of the pot.
Considering the late positions there may be many hands in the BB 3bet calling range which may fold after checking. (he should 3b from BB something like 15% of his range)

You should have in your range KJs, KJo(like 25% freq), 99, QTs, J9s, so plenty of value combos.
AQo is, in my opinion, a very strong candidate for bluffing , though I wouldn't bet it 100% (I would mix 50% check, 50% bet).

Bet the flop with the aforementioned freq and take it from there

Yeah , after the hand I was just like that...
I should have probably bet turn.
Thank you!

sunshine98 Already much dead money in the pot.
Against QQ is a flip
Against KK we have 35%
We are only dead against aces.
He can have AK himself and we may fold it + bluffs

If we do the math considering the dead money in the pot, we have a profitable shove.

I would check back. There are not many hands that can call and we are still ahead of.
I do not think that villain is capped at all since I would have a raising range on that dry board.
We can have 2 possible straight and almost any two pair

I think that KQo belongs into the checking river range and bet with AQo., two pair+ and some air(missed draws which block villain calling range)

I would jam preflop.
On the flop I would call and fold turn unimproved

I think that on the flop check is okay, but I would slightly favor betting since we have an advantage with overpairs. Also , the board is pretty disconnected and he should be calling with many overcards with BDFD or BDSD.

As played , I think that a check is mandatory. I think that 9c is the worst card for us and the best for villain. If we bet and get raised, this would be super akward and nasty with our exact holding.
If we bet and get called, we aren't loving life on many river calls either.
So I think X/C is the best option here

Well , I think your use of GTO is a bit off in this situation. GTO = Game theory optimal. This implies we chose the best possible case in order to minimize our loses. Since we know that villain only bets for value, we fold anything that is weaker than his betting range and call anything that beats him, and this is optimal against this opponent.

If we wouldn't know that he has this strategy, we would like to call more hands since we may assume that he has some bluffs in his range.Thus, if the roles are reversed and we know that villain only calls AQ+ , we would throw many bluffs in our river betting range , and maybe we can bet any two cards.

Nash equilibrium (often confused by GTO) is reached when neither of the players are incentivized to change his strategy, but this is not the case, since another strategy would be optimal for us.

In order to respond to your question(at least what I understood from it), if the roles are reversed and we do not have information about the villain , we would like to use our standard "GTO" strategy vs a good opponent. Since villain is not balanced (he overfolds) , we would make profit with our strategy since he lose EV against our bluffs (in order to not lose EV, he should call in such a way that we are indifferent between checking or betting our strongest bluffs)

If you want to learn more about "theory" in poker , I strongly recommend you Will Tipton's books.

piriformis
I disagree with you. We have range advantage => we should bet all our range. We should make our decision in this order :
range => hand class (nutish, strong, medium, weak, air) => specific hand

If our range wants to bet the majority of time (say 80%) which is the case now , we should bet. On the turn, as Jbarez was saying, villan has filtered his range, and we shouldn't bet again.

We go to the decision. What does our range want ? Probably a mix between betting and checking => We go to hand class and choose the hands accordingly: we bet with strong/nuttish hands and air and we check the rest.

So , in my opinion, flop is fine, turn should be check

I mean , I think it is fine to raise 4x preflop. The rake at 5NL is huge and we should open less hands and by raising bigger preflop, we are not incentivising villans to go to the flop and pay rake

JonathanPla In this particular situation , I call 100% KTs. By most likely I wanted to say that if there is only one preflop agressor, I would 3b KTs sometimes , maybe 20% of the time or so.

But in this situation , this hand is so good multiway that there isn't any prop to 3betting it

I would like a 66% value bet on the river since we have many value combos on this runout.
You should have some flushes and sets and two pairs in your turn checking range. With this information in mind , you would like to get value on the river.

You could also try a smaller 30% value bet on the river and bet more hands for value but this opens us to being raised.

The thing is that few people try to bluff-raise against a relative large size on the river. If we chose a small bet , people may think that we are weak and they go crazy with no balance at all and we are put in an awful spot. I think a 66% bet size would solve this problem

If we face a raise, we call all our flushes and some sets with a blocker to the flush.

The sizing is good if you choose a polarised range on the flop. Also , I do not know why you folded the min raise since you still have plenty of equity.

My approach would have been to check the flop since our range doesn't interact so well with this flop and we would get many free cards which improves our range and our actual hand.

As played , it isn't so bad, but I wouldn't fold against the min raise

I would most likely call the KTs in this situation.
This hand has great playability multiway. If you 3bet it and get called, you basically waste this hand value since you will be playing OOP with a marginal hand which suffers from reversed implied odds.

Also, if you do decide to 3Bet it , I would make it 0,2$ at least, since your small size gives good odds for the others players to call.

Flop check fold. Also , the sizing is rather bad, since you would like a 30% bet with all your range on a A-high disconnected board

Hello Mr Elliot Roe ! Great video and very nicely put.

forCarlotta From the movie Matrix, Neo can chose the red pill or the blue pill. That's from where I got the name ;)

Ugh, interesting spot.
If SB is unknown, we should play our default strategy.
Flop and turn are fine, let's think about our range on the river.

SB is betting 134bb in order to win 104bb in order not to be exploited we have to defend at least 104/104+234 = 0,43 = 43% of our range on the river.

Let's think with what range of hand we get to the river.
We will have all combinations of flushes and we have all pocket pairs 66+ through JJ+ (maybe QQ if you don't 4b them preflop) and maybe the ocasionals ATs, KTs, AK with a club, AQ with a club.

I assume we bet all the combinations since we mostly have more value than air to the river , so we need to balance our value hands. Since SB raised us all in, we have to see what should we calling with.

We have TT and 66 which always call. We may have 50% of QQ, it depends if you 4b them or not, total of 15 combos. We bet ~45 combos, so we need to find more hands to call with.We call with some of our nut flushes.

By the way , ATcc is an extremely good hand to call with here since it blocks TT.

In practice, it depends. I do not know how many players are creative enough to check-raise bluff the river like that, but I have seen many people value betting worse , like K,Q,J,9 high flushes in a spot like this. Maybe even A2.

I would call

I would use a 5BI shot.
Stop the session/day whenever you lose more than 3 buy ins.

Regarding how aggressive you want to be with the bankroll, anything can work. When I deposited on a new site for a promotion, I did something like this:
-> Have 10 BI for a stake (let's say 10NL, so 100$)
-> Grind 2BI for the next shot (next shot would be 16NL, so 32$)
-> When you hit 132$ at NL10 , take a shot to 16NL
-> Play the 16NL until you have 10BI for it (160$) and repeat the algotrithm

I have put your hand into the solver and it suggest the following:
Flop: AJdd is borderline between calling and folding (both having the EV of 0)
Turn: Good bet and good sizing
River: Never ever bluff this combo, we have worse hands to bluff and we do not have a club in our hand. We should be mainly block flushes and overpairs in order to bluff there so :
KxQc, KcQx , QxJc are better bluff candidates.

SB range:

BTN range:

Flop SB decision:

Flop BTN decision:

-> Here we can see that AJ is indifferent to calling/folding , I would fold due to rake:

SB Turn checking range:

BTN turn decision:

-> We can see AJdd likes betting small on the turn:

SB after facing bet on the turn decision:

BTN river decision:

Good analysis, preflop is marginal but I think that the flop call is -EV 3ways and OOP.
Turn and river cooler

So I have entered this hand into a solver and these are the following results:

-> The first thing I have noticed is that the solver bets all the overpairs, sets, trips, straights and no made hands which have flush draw/gutshots or overcards to the board and checks all his showdown holdings (this suggest us that we should adopt a polarised strategy) :

If you don't bet the turn , I assume you will check all your range , so I node locked the solver to check all his range on the turn

Considering that you check everything on the turn , the IP player shouldn't bet too many hands since you have range advantage:
IP decision on the turn

But in practice , that is rarely the case , so I node locked again the solver to something like this: IP is betting any top pair+ , any FD and any OESD

Now on to the river:
The solver checks, since the IP player is polar and we don;t want to fold his bluffs. But let's assume we bet: We bet only value , two pair+

And we get the IP decision:

As you can see , there aren't many bluffs in villain's range. But the solver likes to call with QQ:

This due to the fact that you haven''t any better bluff catcher. You are extremely unbalanced on the river.

Summary: I think that you missplayed this hand quite a lot.
1)First of all , why checking turn ? You have a big range advantage and you should be polar on the turn in order to maximize the value of good hands and boost the EV with your draws and gutshots. You should check everything in between.
2)Why leading the river ? Villan has lots of straight/flush draw which have missed. You make his game very easy: he will fold the bluffs , call or raise with nuts and the ocasional spew hand

Enri It depends how agressive you want to be with your bankroll. Akissv7 is suggesting to move to the next level (5NL in your case) when you have ~ 12-15 buy-ins for the next stake.

So , in your case , you would want to play 5NL whenever you have 12-15 buy-in for it , so basically around 60-70$ and whenever you go below 50$, you should move down to 2NL