Quote Originally Posted by LawDude
We c-bet when there is a significant probability that the flop missed villain's range.
How are you not seeing that T93 isn't bad for his range. He more than likely has at least an overcard. Most broadways either have a straight draw, or overcards + gutshot. A fair amount of hands have made either TP or 2nd pair, and we can't expect him to fold them to one barrel. So really by c-betting here, the majority of hands that he folds are not only hands we beat, but hands we crush (44-77), because as I said he is likely to peel at least one street with overcards, gutshots, straight draws, 2nd pair, TP, etc.

You have to see how this is terrible. Not to mention when we are called, we have very little equity to improve as we have 2 outs when behind. And we would much rather cbet a hand like 97s or something if we were going to cbet such a weak hand, as then we have 5 outs to improve + the chance of a bdfd/bdsd.

Quote Originally Posted by LawDude
And we c-bet because unless you hit a set or a big draw or have very low cards on the board, you really don't want to play too deep into a hand with 88.
I agree we don't want to play deep into this hand, as when we are behind we have very little equity. So why are you, after not getting any of the favorable situations you mention in the above quote, and realizing that this board is decent for villains range, wanting to put money into the pot on the flop? Don't play deep into the hand here = c/f the flop.