Overdoing it?

Nice hand.

I checked the solver out of curiosity, it purely checks 87 on the river and uses 52, 53 for bluffs instead. I guess because 87s is a hand your opponent could call the turn with and then auto-fold the river, so it's not very nice to block it. Also it bets only pot on the river to allow itself to fold 43s, 42s + bluffs facing a shove (because CO still has quite some 6's in their range I imagine : A6, K6, Q6, 76, 65, 66 + 99).

I like it because the board is very BB friendly. The problem is that a lot of villains (with A high or a pair) will say "F**k you, no way you hit a double paired board" and call down. Also since there are quite some possible straight draws (T8, T7, 87, 75) they might be even more inclined to do so. But finally, we want to have some c/r bluffs in our range and we want to follow through on many rivers. But I wonder if you can save some money by betting pot instead (boulgakov had a solver reason for this as well). Don't think that will lower the amount of hands that call you, might even look stronger.

Now that I think about it, I agree that Pot size bet seems to accomplish the same result and saves me 29bb.
Thanks for replies much appreciated.

Is your hand a good bluff if villain is to fold overpairs? If so, that's not very good. Also, why raise an open-ender on the turn, when the board pairs? and why raise small?

Also, consider banning yourself from river overbet bluffing at 10nl. Check with your own database, but presumably smaller sizing is by far performing better than overbets when it comes to river bluffing ; because villain is landing there with a bunch of autofolds, that will obviously fold to any sizing, and a bunch of bluffcatchers that will likely also call to any sizing. If you feel like overbetting is your best shot at making your opponent fold, bluffing is a bad idea.