Came across a 5/10/20 hand (stakes don't matter here) where...

V opens to $50 OTB, BB and UTG call

Flop... 69Jss
BB checks, UTG checks, V checks

Turn... Jd
BB bets $X, UTG folds, V folds

The commentator goes on to say... when V checks back this wet of a flop, they're basically saying "I give up"... which opens the door for UTG or BB to bet turn... If UTG didn't bet, BB would have.. because they both know V can't have a hand there...

However, a concept also holds that we shouldn't be cbetting a wet flop like that in a MW pot..

Where do we draw the balance?

On this sort of board checking is often giving up but it's also often the best thing to do if you have no equity or little equity. There are just too many hands on this sort of board that will call so c-betting air has little chance of working.

You can still occasionally c-bet this sort of board with air if your willing to barrel and you have a tight image. Because this sort of board is ugly a c-bet from a tight player looks stronger and your barreling the turn can get villains off a lot of mediocre made hands that will call one bet to see if the turn helps them. You have to be willing to barrel just about any turn card though because villains can be so wide on the flop there is no way to tell what helped or hurt them.

In the hand you presented the turn card is one of the best cards for taking it away. BB or UTG with JX are likely to check and see if V wants to bet, so they can both easily represent or actually have a jack. And given the board and the flop checked around they are almost never checking a strong made hand on the turn.

Or to put it more directly, sometimes on ugly boards where you have little equity the best flop play is the 0EV give up move because any bet will be -EV.

Couldn't they still be called by 9x, TT that checked back flop?

What turn cards would you not try to take it away on?

Check more strong hands on boards where our cbet-with-air percentage is low ... that is, make that adjustment against players who are aggressive and jump on weakness. This is especially true OOP on boards that are bad for your range.

Obviously against some clueless 1/2NL player who's just rechecking his hole cards every street, you can play more straightforward.

They could be, but there is always some risk in bluffing. On these boards where half the deck is potentially a scare card you don't want to bluff a lot because opponents will call with single pairs more. It is also preferable to have some equity so you can occasionally draw out on your opponent. Normally you wouldn't want to bluff with a marginal draw but on this sort of board you have more FE and less risk of being raised after the flop checks around.

The most likely cards to not c-bet are over cards. AK/AQ/AJ/AT, though obviously not AJ on this board. For the most part I'm not trying to take it away on the turn without equity if something hits that helps those hands. Occasionally against LAGs, particularly ones that are very aggressive c-betters, I will bluff at anything. The reason is that their flop check on this board is also likely to be a low pair/low connector type hand that has nothing, under pair or a gut shot draw.

Norman Chad brought this up to ESPN when he first started commentating for them. You just can't dissect a poker hand without the context of seeing what was going on before. If the hand is being broadcast, it is likely the players know each other fairly well (even Live at the Bike has regulars). A play that makes little sense in isolation can make perfect sense to anyone who's played or watched these players for hours.

Chad's solution is that he doesn't do analysis as a consequence. In this case, we have no way to judge. Sometimes the right decision is give up. I do know that poker is much easier to play and comment on when you can see everyone's hole cards.

^ That probably also holds true for my 5/10 AA thread.