This is from a microstakes $.11 mtt $40 GTD tournament on WPN. I've been trying to practice MTTs for the last month with little success, and I've started to look at my midstack postflop play as a major leak. The following is a hand where I can use some help analyzing. I have no reads on these guys as I just switched tables.

Yatahay Network - 2000/4000 NL (8 max) - Holdem - 8 players

UTG+1: 21.87 BB
MP: 54.57 BB
MP+1: 41.54 BB
CO: 30.52 BB
BTN: 12.34 BB
SB: 87.99 BB
Hero (BB): 28.61 BB
UTG: 40.92 BB

8 players post ante of 0.15 BB, SB posts SB 0.5 BB, Hero posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 2.7 BB) Hero has Qd 9s
fold, fold, fold, fold, fold, fold, SB calls 0.5 BB, Hero raises to 3 BB, SB calls 2 BB

Flop : (7.2 BB, 2 players) Jd Jc 8d
SB checks, Hero bets 2.38 BB, SB raises to 4.75 BB, Hero calls 2.38 BB

Turn : (16.7 BB, 2 players) 5s
SB bets 8.35 BB, fold

SB shows Qc 2s (One Pair, Jacks)
(Pre 0%, Flop 0%, Turn 0%)

SB wins 16.7 BB


Thoughts: Preflop BvB, I like raising with offsuit hands that have both relatively high cards, and Q9o fits the bill.
Flop, I bet 1/3 pot with my gutshot and get min-raised. I usually never fold to minraises as they usually mean nothing at these stakes. I also still have good equity with a Q, T, and bd flush outs and good blockers.
Turn, when V bets half pot, I find two streets of aggression to be an alarm bell. I put him on some 8 that was betting for protection, and I felt like I couldn't risk committing my stack on ~15% equity against a pair. However, I feel like this is where I made a mistake, as after running this through the solver, it seems I should be calling/raising here at almost 100% frequency. I just don't understand how I can be happy calling off or getting it in in this spot with only a gutshot and an overcard. This comes back to me having trouble understanding postflop ranges at these stack depths, as I think I'm putting my opponents on too strong of a hand when they double-barrel causing me to fold too often on flops and turns, all in fear of not having any chips left to play after.

Any resources on the above topic would be helpful, as the only resource I've read that discusses postflop MTT play is Harrington's Vol1 which seems a bit outdated and doesn't seem to address the nuances of blind v blind play.

The hand looks fine to me. PFR size is good at this depth and hand selection is good.

On the flop, it's typical to size down a lot. Your range contains all the strong overpairs, all the strong and middling Jx, as well as the strong middling pairs and the best 8x. SB's range very rarely contains any of these hands, so a middling Jx is the top of their range, with some 8x, some draws, and a whole bunch of air. I suspect you could bet 1bb with your entire range profitably given this range advantage and position, as a simplified strategy. A checkback range with some strong hands, as well as some hands that can play future streets, will make you tougher to play against.

Once you bet 1/3 and get raised tiny you will have to continue with this much equity and position.

Turn looks like an easy fold to me and perhaps a very occasional bluff all-in or double float. I am surprised solver wants to continue with 100% frequency. Perhaps since your queen and nine both interact with the Jx and 8x that would take the limp/call, check/raise, bet line, and since queen high has some showdown value given the lack of king high or better that would take this line, solver wants to call down brick runouts?

Have you ensured you calibrated the simulations correctly?

Here's a screenshot of when I ran it through GTO Wizard. This is using the 8 player ChipEV model with 30bb eff stacks.



Looking at it, it seems to use Q9 with the Qd as a rr bluff, which makes sense given the blockers. What is interesting to me though is that the solver follows MDF by continuing with 2/3 of hands to this turn bet, allowing us to continue with a lot of hands which includes gutshot hands like all of our QT and Q9.

Ah, I see what's going on. The Q9o combos are losing 15.34 bb/100 with that line as a means to balance all your other hands that want to jam for value or call turn for pot control/as a trap. This is what makes the solver unexploitable, taking lines that are neutral EV with an entire range against a range constructed with the same principles.

As you can see from this quite simple spot, the solver produces a strategy that is nigh impossible for a human to implement in game, with a bunch of mixing at variable frequencies of raises, calls and folds for each individual combination. I'd try to severely simplify this strategy as a player learning the ropes.

For this spot, something like:
Call your best hands most of the time, raise them some of the time.
Call your middling hands, fold your worst hands.
Call your best draws some of the time, jam them most of the time.
Call your worst draws some of the time, jam them some of the time, fold them some of the time.

The outputs won't be as tough to play against as the solver's output, but still approaching unexploitable while (hopefully) being profitable against the population.