Im sure most of you heard of this hand:

The stakes: $50/$100/$200 with a $500 straddle

Stack sizes:

Rampage – $136,000
Garrett Adelstein – $282,000

Rampage open-raises from the Button to $1,300 with 5♥ 4♥. Garrett 3-bets from the Big Blind with T♠ 9♠. Rampage calls.
The flop falls J♦ T♥ 8♦ with $7,350 in the pot. Garrett checks and Rampage bets $6,500. Garrett calls.
The turn is the (J♦ T♥ 8♦) 7♥ with $24,250 in the pot. Garrett checks and Rampage bets $16,000. Garrett calls.
The river completes the J♦ T♥ 8♦ 7♥ T♣ board with $56,250 in the middle. Garrett checks and Rampage bets $45,000.

Couple of questions:

Is it best to simplify and check/call with entire continuing range on this flop in Garrett's shoes vs an overbluffy opponent?
I personally see this as a good strategy.

My main question is what do we make of Rampage river size? What hands is he representing and what hands is he trying to fold out?
Does a straight ever want to take this sizing? It seems unlikely, he's never getting called by worse. So this sizing to me is indicative of just a full house or air. Garrett's range on the river is mainly full houses/straights/pair plus draws/busted draws and very infrequently overpairs/top pairs. I think Rampage should go for like a 25k bet with his holding and straights in order to target the non fullhouse/straight portion of his opponent's range. The rest of Garrett's range will always continue no matter if it is 50% or 80% pot bet. Garrett's never folding a straight given Rampage image unless he faces a shove. Perhaps shove JJ/ JT/TT and J8/87?

Wouldn't get too into it really there are all kinds of reasons players do what they do, though, I think Ethan did critique his own sizing in his vlog.

Garrett might range check this board, since it favors Ethan and they’re very deep, but who knows. Garrett probably doesn’t have check-raises because Ethan has Q9s/97s and Garrett probably doesn’t/shouldn’t, and again they’re very deep.

About what Ethan can be repping here. Let’s just say that Ethan has a reputation for running huge multi barrel bluffs. Out of curiosity, has anyone ever seen him start a bluff on flop and then give up by the river? Not sure that I have. Which if true means he’s probably way overbluffing on rivers. If Garrett knows that he probably adjusts by overcalling in this spot. Maybe Garrett should fold QQ/KK since it blocks KQ, and just call down with AJ/AA/9x and raise his JTs/JJ/TT. If Garrett is calling all those hands then Ethan might compensate by going for big sizings with his 9x. That way he won’t be overbluffing quite as much on rivers.

Of course. Ethan should probably stop overbluffing rivers. But given that he does, he may be justified to widen his value range to include 9x because Garrett is going to be calling down so wide. But who knows. Players have specific reads on each other so it can be hard to tell how one is exploiting, and what the best counter-exploit for the other is.

I looked at it in a solver just out of curiosity. Used 100 BB stacks though.

Garret's hand strongly leaned to bet which surprised me. Ethan's flop bet was strongly favored, for all 54s but especially with the bdoor flush draw. On the turn check behind was strongly favored for Ethan but only with that 54s combo.

Didn't look at the river.

I find it hard that anyone including Garrett would call down with one pair. The only one that might make sense is AJcc/AJss/AcAs blocking full houses and unblocking flush draws even though we block AK.

Both players can have boats here so I think the river sizing is weighed more towards thick value instead of thin. When I said shove JJ/TT/JT and J8/87 I mean as Rampage. Have the overbet size and a small size with straights and missed flushes...

Didn't think either player played the hand badly tbh. I think I actually prefer small/small/small, maybe like 1/3rd half half, instead of big/big/big here in rampage's shoes tho given the turn, puts a much larger portion of Garrett's range in the blender imo.

Idk if Rampage uses overbets. You’re probably right that he does. Is Rampage loose enough preflop to have KQ, including KQo? I was guessing so. If so, and given he will only have 9x/boats with this line/sizing then Garrett should probably call down with AA and AJ (favoring AJ > AA) except for AhAd which is probably a fold on turn. Basically any 1-pair hand that doesn’t contain a K/Q would work. Garrett probably doesn’t want to call with 87 because he loses to some of Rampage’s bluffs like A8/K8/Q8.

The reason Garrett may want to call down with 1-pair hands is that Rampage has a reputation as an overbluffer — basically once he starts a bluff on the flop he never gives it up on a later street — and on this board many of the draws brick. Against this type of player sometimes you just have to hold on for dear life with a mediocre hand. Just my opinion.

Does Garrett have to defend 1-pair hands on the river? My guess would be he has to defend wider than 9x/boats/ATs.

Yes, including Rampage himself.

And yes, of course pros are going to say a punt is a good line. It's in their best interest to do so.

https://youtu.be/f3eshEYQDko

John Little breaks it down pretty well.

I don't think i'd be in this spot though. I would just give up on this flop.

Yeah I think Doug Polk said basically the same thing, except he was more harsh on the flop decision about how a seemingly small mistake early in the hand can cascade into a much larger loss than you'd expect. But yeah, once he gets to the turn he needs to be bluffing with his hand.

Interestingly when I looked this up on Solver+ @200BB it favored betting flop, but with a 2/3rd pot bet size (also hands like 22 and 33 and then legit semibluffs like K9, A9).

The bet size seems critical... Solver+ favors betting 2/3rds pot by a huge margin over 1/3rd pot, which I guess requires a more polarized range with a lot of flush draws being checked back. Whereas if you were forced to bet 1/3 pot you'd tend to favor the flush draws and just check the trash hands.

But as played Jonathan Little seems to give the obviously correct advice, although I'd say his river analysis is better than obvious.