If we're check-raising with a balanced range, what would we be check-raising for value on this flop, when we limped in UTG? We shouldn't have very many strong hands on this board, whereas V can have all the over-pairs, top / middle set, maybe bottom set, maybe top 2, and higher flush draws.

At this stack depth, it just doesn't seem to make much sense to re-open the betting with a drawing hand. If we want to put max pressure on V, we can do it on the turn, with a lot of cards that favor our range over his. We could donk out on any 5 through J.

V is described as a good player. If so, he may be able to put us on a range of 22, T8dd, and 86dd exactly, especially when he has 77. He's going to be coming back over the top, a lot, with 99, 77, over-pairs with a diamond, and nut flush draws. We're not going to be in great shape when that happens, and it could happen much more than you guys are allowing.

So you want to semibluff an unimproved turn when our equity is cut in half?

Potentially, yes.

Check-raises on the flop are going to be more bluff-heavy than turn check-raises. So, while our equity may be less, our fold equity is improved.

The problem with check-raising flop is that it sets up awkward situations when we don't make our hand on the turn, especially in spots where our range is more weighted towards bluffs than value, and we're deep-stacked. We'll feel compelled to barrel turn, reducing the SPR going to the river, often leading to an air-ball jam.

If we were shallower, I could see check-raising flop, and jamming turn. But this deep, we're setting ourselves up to bet three streets. I'd rather check-call flop, see a cheap turn, then decide if I want to get aggro with this hand.

We might donk-lead turn, or check-raise, or check-call, or check-fold. We have more options when we just check-call the flop, as opposed to check-raising.