AQ98ds

From a theoretical standpoint, I don't think splitting Hero cbets to get all-in over two streets on flop and turn is terrible or anything; i just don't think it really matters in practice vs. this opponent though, since Hero is getting the right price to stack off no matter what.

Is villain more likely to make a mistake vs a shove, or vs a check? I'd guess a check helps a fish play better on both flop and turn (if flop checks through), but again, I don't think its meaningful.

Even if we lock the game-tree for Hero to check only for the remainder of the hand, Hero is going to have a profitable xc on all but a handful of runouts. And getting villain to fold non pair outs, and medium/baby pairs on flop is generally a sizeable EV win. Even when we heavily dominate the opponent's hand.

Didn't bother with the suits in the sim, it adds a tiny bit more equity for Hero, even on rainbow flop.

For me this is a spot we just lock in the +EV with a shove, since even the opportunity to exploit is very narrow - it would have to be a specific read on getting villain to incorrectly fold some pairs on the turn or something, when he is a sticky whale, or give ourselves the chance to make some Hero folds against top of villain range on bad turns.

Playing more hands per hr also has value, so Hero can also cost himself EV by increasing the complexity of the line without much upside. We certainly don't want to check back, and wait three minutes for fish to decide what he will do next.

Imo vs range most likely to make a mistake against a tiny bet, 2nd most likely to make a mistake against a check and 3rd most likely to make a mistake against a shove.

Vs the actual hand there is merit in shipping if we think he sometimes folds better for some reason. I don't think the player profile supports that assumption. The player profile supports an assumption that hero can get all the money in also by checking.

Maybe the best argument against a check indeed is that it might make the hand last longer.

We're interested in likelihood of mistake * magnitude of that mistake so a tiny bet nets us a tiny mistake.

I agree with the above poster

Here is the more extreme example. Villain needs to call 225 to win something like 1035, so needs ~22% equity to call profitably.
If villain folds jt54 (4 live cards and some backdoors) that is a $150/10 BB error vs Hero actual hand, but would be correct to fold if he put hero on AAxx.
Villain only has ~10% equity vs aaxx.

Villain will also have plenty of hands between 25-35% equity, etc. where even if villain calls, it may not be a bad result for Hero.

SHOVEEEEE

Hence (obviously?) Hero doesn't want to shove AA, especially exploitatively. Therefore (obviously?) Hero very likely wants to have a small sizing here, even if he can never fold to a raise (lol). I don't know if I'm "overthinking" or "being too fancy" or something. I just don't think there can be a massive shift in EV between checking, betting tiny or shipping. I agree that this might not be the right hand to bet small. I just don't think it matters much.

I understand that for beginners (not meaning anyone in particular) this can be impossibly hard to grasp.