More food for thought:

There are 40 combos of AK-AJ villain can have here and half of those combos are going to block some of our "perceived range" of ATs/KTs/QTs/JTs. If villain holds AK for example, our perceived value range drops from 8 combos of ATs-JTs to 6 combos (because villain blocks AT and KT).

If villain holds AJ and doesn't believe you to be the type to defend with KTs/QTs, only ATs/JTs, then our perceived value range drops even further from 4 combos to only 2 combos (AT and JT).

This is kind of the discussion I am trying to have. I am wondering which hands are best to take this line with. Of course if I am doing this will all counterfeited pairs and all straight draws, I am bluffing far too much on the river. Also, is a shove the best sizing to use for my range? I would say yes, because I am fairly polarized. I do not really have any middling value bets which need to use a smaller sizing.

So, do counterfeited pairs make good flop calls? There is actually a pretty big equity difference between 88 and 22. I am not sure where to draw the line, though.

By the river, KQ really has no more showdown value than 77. A hand like QJ is pretty bad to check/call on the turn if it is in villain's range, IMO, so villain's range shouldn't contain any hands worse than A-high by the river. That means the better bluffs will be hands with positive blocking effects, so we need to figure out what villain's turn and river calling ranges look like.

Johnny, I would actually say exploitative play is strictly superior to GTO play, as GTO is a subset of exploitative play. I want to play pseudo-GTO here because I do not really know what all of villain's leaks are. I know he is c-betting far too much, and I can adjust to that by defending more than I need to against his c-bets, and moving some of my preflop value 4-bets into my calling range. Past the flop, though, I do not have a good idea and would like to try to play balanced from there.

When I get to the river in a spot like this with Tx and jam, I tend to worry that villain will be able to exploitatively fold his entire range to me. When I get to the river with a bluff, I tend to worry that villain doesn't think I'd jam for value here, but instead may use a smaller sizing, or thinks I am overbluffing like you do, so he'll look me up. I do not know what villain's strategy will be. I don't really like to treat poker as a guessing game. If I am close to balanced I do not have to worry about this, as I can just worry about ensuring my strategy as a whole is profitable. It is different against fish who are more predictable and have more apparent leaks who I can exploit pretty hard without worrying too much about being wrong.

^^^^

you are trying to bring a ferrari to a honda meet man.

I understand for higher limits and over all general poker ability, we all need to learn balance and GTO as we move up.

this is low limits, your gonna spew so much trying to make balanced plays vs unbalanced people.

but I respect the grind cause overall understanding the game better is better for us overall.

Yea it seems awfully weak to use Ax as a ck-c ott.

few points:

-KTs etc are standard defends against non-nits (including here), esp for this sizing/depth

-id be pretty surprised if you cant profitably defend 22-66 here. it sounds like you arent really factoring in villain playing poorly (including/especially flop cbet of 100% which is horrendous). i did some loose back of envelope math and came up w/ you making back ~70% of the 9 bbs you need just from flopping sets (net of getting stacked set over set); again wouldnt be surprised if you made it all back just from flopping sets with more realistic/optimistic assumptions.

-i agree raising flop is a good option; folding AK/AQ is pretty big for this hand. you ofc have other hands that benefit from raising too so w/e if you didn't choose this one

-one way to approach this is: practically speaking, on turn/river you have to make a judgment call of what hands he is going to fold and when. if you think he folds ace high on the turn, then is he really folding pairs on river after calling turn? point here is that if you are confident that turn+river will fold out ace high and be profitable, it might be that he folded those hands on the turn and the river was -ev (and turn was ++ev).

-if you want to just say idk what he will do, and are looking to craft some sort of balance/equilibrium approach and choose the right bluffs etc. then: as you have noted, you get to the river with more bluffs than your value range can support, so you will have to xb river and give up with some. this being said, you may want to xb turn with some of these hands - for instance KQ, which has a bit of sdv vs his bet/check range, as opposed to QJs/87s/88/77 which do not.

-(assuming a theoretical approach) once you get to river this way, i think you should pay more attention to not bluffing too much rather than blockers. blocker effects are going to depend a lot on what he called/folded earlier and are going to be close either way. im sure you could figure out best blocker effects vs his best response etc, its just probably not worth it and definitely not worth it in game

-a final general note is that i would suggest paying attention to how he plays turns as the pf aggressor (iirc you indicate you dont really know). when someone has the huge leak of cbetting 100% (or just too much in general) it is really valuable to know what they do with that weak range on the turns (do they xf a lot? ->float, etc...)

results???

He tank folded with no indication of whether he was contemplating a hero call with A-high or made a big laydown with AA.

A player to my left goaded me a little into flashing him my hand before I mucked, which was a mistake because he couldn't stop talking about it for 15 minutes, and brought some unwanted strategy discussion to the table.

The European pro player on my right indicated that he would likely exploitatively fold all overpairs to my river sizing, and said I should bet smaller, but I think he thought I had value when he said that.