On some flops, lots of hands are mixed in theory and it's not obvious (at least to me) how we can simplify our strategy a bit in order to craft something implementable. For example, on J98r flop BTN vs BB, GTOWizard gives the image below as the cbet strategy. How would you think about simplifying this to be more implementable? E.g. let's say we want to just have 1 sizing and have pure rather than mixed strategy.

You could use only half pot and play similar frequencies

I'm very new to solvers so could be off but from what im learning the solvers will create a baseline and its up to us to interpret the outputs and through running additional solves where you can lock in a decision like you mentioned for eg only bet 1 size, you then get to see the movement in EV this has vs the baseline where you bet multiple sizes plus how the solver reacts to this. Through this process you will learn to understand WHY The solver does what it does which is the ultimate reason they are utilized.

Having a pure strategy like you said would be easy to test vs equilibrium through moving your hands into either betting or checking grouped in a polarized fashion. the problem i think is that you will i imagine be losing substantial EV vs equilibrium and you open yourself up to being counter exploited.

I'm very new to this so dont have a pure answer if there is one but am interested in what other more educated members have to say

I'm not sure that I agree with this. Surely if you play in a way that is not at equilibrium, you can potentially gain more EV than equilibrium in exchange for opening yourself up to counter-exploitation, (and of course you just hope that your opponents on average don't cotton on and counter exploit you, so that you get to keep your higher EV).

I am assuming this on the basis that playing exploitatively yourself is done so that you can outperform the solver EV, otherwise why would one be doing it? For example, if you assume your opponent is too nutted when he raises you huge on the river, you fold all of your bluff catchers and only continue with your nutted hands, whereas a solver would over-call the raise with bluff catchers in order to keep your opponent 'honest' and would lose EV vs the exploitative style as it would be paying off too much value with the bluff catchers.

How do you get this answer? And How do GTO solver make this result ?

I've just solved a lot of **** in the past so I would expect that to be the output

run the flop in pio/whatever solver for 25% cbet only, 33% cbet only, 40% cbet only 50% cbet only, 66% only, 75% only etc then see which strategy has the highest EV or the easiest strategy to play (or toughest for oop) and play that

what if it was 976 or QT9 or KJT
what if u added or removed nutted hands from either player's range