When/what to x-r on turn after cbetting flop?

To simplify the situation, we check-raise turn after cbet to protect our turn checking range. If we don't, our turn check range is fairly weak and opponent can exploit us if he picks it up. So the first question is if the opponent is

A) capable to realize if you turn range is weak
B) Aggressive and good enough to attack it

That is if we don't add strong hands to our check range on draw heavy boards. If the answer to either A or B is no, I would just cbet with strong hands as it doesn't backfire. But once we face better opponents who can exploit if we are heavily unbalance, we need to put more balance to your ranges. I don't think we need to aim for perfect balance, as often it is enough that opponent sees few times that we take the line bet, check-raise for him to realize that we are not capped with turn check. How much we want to do it is based then more to opponents aggression and whether he adjusts or not.

Versus unknowns in most player pools I would just barrel top set there. Majority of players are often just checking the turn to see the river, and our plan fails. Also to make low SPR on the turn often means that opponent's turn call is -EV even with the implied odds. If our cbet is +EV in the long run, I would take it unless I am sure checking is more +EV. And for that I would need some notes/reads.

Yeah I am not trying to get to gto frequencies by any means but I think understanding concepts behind the lines solver takes is very valuable. Like in this case we dont want to check our top sets that has good back up but use weaker ones. What I have noticed in pool I have played is that in PLO50-100 (compared to plo25) there is definitely lot more people taking stabs in position versus missed flop cbet. Which is often effective as most players dont approach spot from balanced view and check range is too capped. But yeah likely pool will not be that stab happy in missed turn barrel spots. That said we can still throw some of these weaker top sets in as check.

Its in good amount of spots also about making your life easier in a way. Like if our approach is to go for thin value with kind of merged range it will bring more nasty spots on later street with pot being bigger as well. Common spot could be e.g. BUvsBB single raised pot, flop J♠:T♥:6♥: and we have dry top two pair like AJT5 with no spades or hearts. Majority of players will just cbet that 100% and I would do it more often than not as well. But when you think about scenarios that can happen check start to make good amount of sense:

- Are you happy to face x-r on flop?
- How often turn and river will not change nuts? We are not thrilled to see A, K, Q, 9, 8, 7, heart or even 6. Also turn like 4♠: open ton more awkward river cards.

So to check flop in this case with top two is not only or primarily about protecting check range (which is plus) but also to look forward and see issues in visibility of the hand.

I also think that a lot of players put themselves in nasty spots with cbetting hands that don't really improve on boards where equities shift a lot on later streets (=draws get there often).

It makes sense to use dry top sets to c-raise, as it doesn't block opp semibluffing range and is happy to get the money in and realize full equity.

In more reg-heavy and aggressive pools there are always players who stab vs check. Like at Party FF pool I have notes on several players that they stab very often vs turn check, and some of them even float flops with almost nothing (and in bad spots imo). It might be somewhat profitable strategy, as most of the pool over folds after turn check. Not sure though if it's profitable to blindly attack those checks. Versus those players I think it's very important to make sure you are the one who is exploiting and not the other way. Once I adjust and start to exploit their aggression vs turn checks, I pay attention to how they react. Some might shut down stabs once you c-raise them few times, which means that I need to adjust again.

Once we start to check-raise turns in these situations, we need to start thinking about balancing that check-raise range. Here's something to think about:

At 100bb game, we can often commit our stack with raise. Is it a problem, if our check-raise range is always for value?

Well in dynamic boards we can also include hands that has reasonable amount of equity in x-r range. I have noticed solver rarely seems to use draws without showdown value. Like on that K73J board hand like AKQT with fd is very viable hand to x-r but hand like AQT9 is usually either barreling or taking x-c line at least versus pot size bet from in position player. So even those x-r hands are sort for value. On some more static boards there might be space more for low equity x-r-f lines as sizings are often smaller and SPR bit higher on turn. But like on dynamic boards its kind of spot where small x-r sizing doesnt make much sense for overall range.

On some even dynamic boards versus stab happy players it can also make sense to x-c some overkill type hands that are happy to continue on most rivers but also block villain stack off range. But I think in these you really want to know your opponent so that we dont lose too much value if in fact villain is bet-calling too wide. Often even if IP player is stabbing with high frequency he might not do it in polarized enough fashion leading into spots where player feels committed to continue with mediocre made hand that solver wise would work better as check back.