You said it was an "obvious standard bluff," because lol bottom of our range. Now you are back pedaling.

I was asking if it was a standard triple - you said it was. But it is not.

Don't know how you pick your bluff candidates but I prefer the ones with higher EV. Still don't know what your point is. Are you trying to say that your assumptions about villain is right and we should not have a bluffing range?

I'm pretty sure everyone here considers exploits. Personally I'm interested in the equilibrium strategy, which also helps me figure out if my exploits makes sense.

Can someone explain to me why flop is a 1/2 pot bet rather than a smaller size? Are we still betting range with this sizing or nah?

It's not quite a range bet (~70% frequency) but it's not some huge mistake to bet range.

Bet sizing is one of the hardest things to master. BTN has all QQ-AA and UTG doesn't, but UTG has way less combos in his 3bet calling range than BTN has in his 3betting range.

I have UTG at 51 combos vs BTN's 164 combos. So usually, when we have a nut advantage we go larger. But now we are against this super condensed range that has 99/88 at a decent frequency. So let's say UTG has 2 combos of 99 and 1 combo of 88. Well that's 3 combos out of 51, which is almost 6% of his total range. Plus TT/JJ (12 combos always) which make up closer to 30% of his range (15 of 51). And UTG never has hands like KQo/AQo. Which BTN always has.

So I think we have 2 opposing forces working against each other. The fact that UTG has a higher % of strong hands relative to his preflop range makes us want to go smaller, but then the fact that UTG never has AA-QQ makes us want to go bigger.

So we end up landing somewhere in the middle.

*Sorry had to edit to get the combos right