Exactly, that was what I was saying. It only makes sense with a straight flush. With the nut flush or whatever you would not want to give a set odds to call.

Is the turn bet the only reason we're ruling out QQ and JJ?

It doesn't make sense to bet 28% pot in position reopening the action OTT with a set on a flush board into someone who check/3-bet the flop. He also might 3-bet QQ/JJ preflop, and might 4-bet them on the flop with the wet board.

Anyway, those hands beat 22, so they might be another reason to fold if you mainly suspect the straight flush. Not that bet/folding is an easy play to make there or necessarily the best play.

The turn bet sizing is pretty interesting for various reasons. First of all, Ruane raises the flop and calls a 3-bet. Then he bets 28% pot in position. After all the raising, now a small bet on a wet board. He isn't worried about a c/r from a player who check/3-bet the flop. If he had a flush, he would not want to give a price to a set or to a flush draw (if Ruane didn't have the nut flush). He wants to price Obst in to draw, but he isn't worried about a c/r; maybe wants to induce one. What can he have?

If Ruane had some kind of hand he was turning into a bluff, wouldn't he bet larger OTT. Yeh, maybe he could bet small to represent a straight flush and try to steal it on the river. What hands could he be turning into a bluff after raise/calling on the wet board on the flop? Is he really going to make a play like that after Obst has shown so much strength OTF and at this stage of the tournament?

Yeah but I mean we're ruling QQ out cos he just called the flop 3bet.

Here is the hand.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Moou6sEe9U

I doubt anyone ever bets small to represent a straight flush

Exactly, that is why only a straight flush makes sense.