Soulread with nickels or unnecessary spew?

You're the typical "SoLvEr SaYs It'S A CaLl" without any thought process other than what a program is spitting out at you. You should know live poker specifically is played so far from "GTO" that playing anywhere near a GTO strat is terrible. Solver and you are making an assumption about villains 3b range given its bvb and in a live 1/3 his range is nowhere near what the solver is spitting out. Laziness is actually using a solver without any other thought - in online settings or higher stake live settings it makes sense to some extent, but you should think a little deeper.

i see 3 combos of TT, 3 of 88, 2 of Atss, ~2 of 22 (assuming we mix pre given stacks), 2 of T8ss, 2 of A8ss, and whatever amount of AKo / AQo / AJss+ (maybe ~12-15 in aggregate?) you decide to peel flop with.

flop looks like a mix vs this size but that's going to rely on realizing your equity / ev on later streets by playing well, and usually these types of underpairs make for good turn / river bluffs when they check. i dont really want to get in the whole "you can just fold ur range i promise ur not getting exploited dude" thing.

It's low stakes and villain 3-betted and close to potted the flop. He represented an overpair, and this isn't going to be a bluff or whiffed AK that often. This just is not a good situation to make a play or call down.

The time you used to craft this word salad could have been used to learn something to make you a better poker player.

C'est la vie.

You said this table line up is super soft and going to be a breeze and yet you go to war for stacks with pocket 5’s half way through the first orbit. Seriously, WTF?

agreed, but lean to the limp because bumping it doesn't accomplish much and then we are limp/calling 20 not raise/folding

profit is profit no matter where/when it comes from

flop is bad but river is the only play IMO.

I dunno, I think he's kind of right though. I don't agree with him that "playing anywhere near a GTO strat is terrible", but one should try to understand why the solver says X or Y, don’t you think? I also noticed you didn’t respond to Illiterat's #13 post about the difference between solver ranges and actual low stakes villains' ranges. So I do agree that mindlessly saying "solver says this" without any further context is in fact what's lazy, and I don’t even think it’s allowed on this forum fwiw. I'm curious why you chose to type your above response instead of a substantive one.

When you only lose 15 folding to the 3! or only lose 60 folding to the cbet.

You should think outside the box and understand how solvers compute what they do as well as if that is the most profitable line, otherwise you'll be stuck in low stakes for a long time. You should know live players are insanely exploitable and the best way to exploit that is to play highly exploitable yourself. This hand is a prime example of the solver assuming a certain 3b range when in reality that range is most likely much tighter and this is a fold.

Result:

He probably meant to say "straight", unless he actually misread the board. Maybe he put you on J9, but that's pretty MUBsy here.

Not sure I believe he had AK when he c-bets the flop but checks turn from OOP, on such a draw-heavy board.

the point is that we shouldnt be here on the river but since were are it would be dumb to throw more money down the drain by folding when hero's bluffraise AI is more profitable.

All I can say is that I hope it worked. I would have folded to the 3bet.