Turn strategy with AAxx in 3way 3b-pot oop

I would just x-f to this big sizing most of time. Yes our hand is kind of ok for unblocking reasons and bdfd. But bdfd is only to weak flush and we have no help with AA otherwise in form of equity. From my experience people tend to heavily underbluff on average in paired flops and even more so when its 3bet pot. When BU has player behind who is maniac overplaying ton of stuff it should make his range very strong anyway. Thus moving his betting more toward value/equity driven approach. I would assume he has something to stack off versus EP possibly always. Which usually means at least combo draw of some sort.

On specifics about solver using certain card to call more or less can usually be derived from checking where opponent bet range mainly come from. Though in paired boards solver approach is often very very mixed and its tough to find clear patterns.

For logical reasons why AAK fold more than AAQ I could see two potential points:

- KK is value betting in BU shoes in which case its better to unblock it so we beat bottom of value range.
-Having K in BU shoes increases his bluff frequency which means by unblocking K we will make bluff bit more likely.

I had instant access only to COvsBUvsSB spot, on 755ss flop. But there solver leads for 1/3.

I think general population under bluffs these situations heavily, so check-fold is good option imo. There is a big difference between HU pots and 3way pots in terms of FE and odds for someone to hit the flop. Naked AA has really poor visibility, meaning that our hand rarely improves. Once we check-call the flop, we kinda hope that opp checks back turn and river. Once someone bets 3way, it usually means they have some connection on the board. So in best case scenario we are 50/50 or even small favorite, but we have to let opponent see river for free if he chooses so. And it's really hard to call another bet on turn or river. On the other hand, opponent might have us down to 2 outs.

Versus two checks BU should bet about 40% with 1/3 sizing on the flop. In reality, that is not happening. Once opponents ranges weight more towards value ranges, the solver strategy for AA changes too. I would say that especially in 3way 3bet pots most player pools deviate from solver ranges to much, that I wouldn't look too heavily into solver strategies.

From my experience people tend to heavily underbluff on average in paired flops

This is true but villain was quite aggressive and cbetting too much so I actually want to defend at least according to GTO here. If I fold AAxx I am pretty much overfolding imo.

I had instant access only to COvsBUvsSB spot, on 755ss flop. But there solver leads for 1/3.

I also used the COvsBUvsSB sim. Yes we have a very high cbetting frequency both with range and AAxx (~50%!) but the AAxx with bdfd are checking 100% at vision...

I am not trying to improve but looking to gii on safe turn-cards.

So you guys say villain is betting a range of trips primarily? Not sure if that was the case but 3way it might still be true that BU is underbluffing significantly. I think I gotta figure out, what our bluffing range on paired boards should look like so I get a feeling for the right proportions...

Not just trips but if bottom of his stab range is e.g. fd+gs+pocket/7 or maybe nfd+gs he is still going to have ton of equity versus dry AA. Imo we need him to have some low equity blocker bluffs but with third player being maniac it becomes way less likely.

Still for us issue is also that third player left to act which tighten our approach even more.

AA+bdfd is 65% betting frequency (1/3 sizing) on 755ss, SBvsCOvsBU.

I am not agreeing on you over folding, if you check-fold non-connected AAxx. The first thing is, if opponent is mostly valuebetting, you should check-fold a lot of non-connected AAxx. If we make a sim where either opponent cbets only hands that connect the board, solver would check-fold a lot.

Interesting dynamic especially at lower stakes is that most players would not fold AA there. A lot of players would stack off with naked AA on that flop. That's why we see very rarely pure bluffs on3bet pots. Some players like to gamble and would pot with nfd or fd+oesd/wrap. But the weaker their hand is, the more often they use pot sizing. Half a pot bet ip 3way instead free turn = almost always pure value. If it was HU, it would be different.

CO shouldn't go over the top often, as after hero's check he should bet for value if he had a hand. But after hero calls on the flop, he gets good price to come along. And suddenly there would be very few "safe" turns.

If we are worried that our check range 3way is too weak, the question would be "is opponent good enough to understand AND exploit that?". If answer is yes, then we add stronger hands to our checking range so that we can check-call more or check-raise. If the answer is "no" (as it is versus almost all opponents at PLO20) then it doesn't matter even if we fold 100% of our checking range.