I checked both situations where we are against MP only having CO fold otf and then if we face the turn-shove/call with better odds. My initial thought was to call in the second scenario because of better pot-odds (my first guess would be having roughly more than 23% equity too) and the knowledge solver stacks-off despite insufficient equity if we have SDV when our equity is nutted and close to the stack-off threshold. But I took a more close look finding solver facing MP shove folds 80%+ when CO calls but stack-offs 70%+ when CO folded the flop, obv. it is just the other way round. So I think there is a misconception about odds in all those stack-off situations because often we are getting just barely not enough nutted equity to call according to pot-odds but if we have a nut-draw together with SDV it is likely solver goes along with it facing himself heads-up because villain should be semi-bluffing hands that have less or no nuttiness or even no Ace+, theoretically we are less prone to run into a players´ top-range. This is kinda comparable where we cold-call tigther preflop facing more opponents despite the better odds to enter the pot.
In reality we have other deviations from GTO again shifting the odds into favour of an exploitative fold even more. Decent regulars are especially tight 3way and also way tighter if they face players they assume being good, bluff less and they often have stack-off avoidance tendencies aswell. Tom Chamber showed, the impact of card removals gets pretty significant when ranges funnel into something very tight and condensed like turn stack-offs 3-way. If you think about it if villain is somewhat decent and aggressive he should be shoving many hands that are non-nutted like wrap+fd or top-2pair (where our Equity remains pretty decent). But once CO calls who is supposed to have a solid range too (sth. you also have spotted in one of the hands I posted earlier) this has the mentioned heavy impact of card removal effect since the nutwrap often blocks a 
and many flushdraws are likely to come along. It is pretty unlikely none of both has flushdraw nor straightdraw (that block Kings) and one of them is more likely to have a QQQ set so our outs to a 777 bottom-set is also devalued a little. So when 1 players has made SDV of at least top2-pair and the other at least a flushdraw along of his combo-hand I would assume instead of 11-13 outs we rather are somewhere having 6-9 outs at best which equals 15-24%. The laid pot-odds are ~23% so it can turn into a pretty bad play quickly. Considering rake and mentioned tendencies I conclude that we should fold if CO comes along aswell but call if there is no CO in play and MP at the same time is capable of semi-bluffing draws which is pretty counter-intuitive because of worse pot odds.
Solver is not stabbing the flop 50% but with a 33% sizing which I like way more. It allows us to stab relatively wide while remaining leverage to gii on the next street vs 2players or play a 3 streets game headsup ip. It still generates massive FE and at the same time makes our turn folds less expensive with little money invested.
I personally think stabbing full pot on a 2toned A-flop is a nice alternative, sth. I already tried in 3way 3bp ip. We generate way more FE and maximize polarity and also range advantage (both AA & QQ) by implementing more pressure, if they are regs they should be aware of having AA standing on our face. Both of those we have as much as you can get in this game. Solver also bets some full pot but not with this particular hand but I´d do it anyways in this situation since PLO25 regular do not defend well in 3bp oop. No decent regular flat-calls AA (also should not) and nobody will bluff a lot 3way, some might "protection" check-raise us with a hand they called preflop (often should not) like QQ or Top-bottom 2pair but we are good against that. Against calls we can also continue pressing the gas pedal shoving basically all turns (maybe not A♦:, A♥: or A♣: ).
