1) If you really believe he'll only rarely bluff when you check to him (which i think is pretty ridiculous frankly) then of course c/f.

As for how I'd play the hand vs a tag, I am at a loss, because I doubt I would ever have 98 from preflop. Turning my hand into a semibluff and betting seems best. Since he likes to float, even better. Depending on how compulsive of a floater he is, and depending on how thinly he valuebets in float scenarios, I would either c/c or c/f the turn.

Also, having 9s8s or 9c8c makes it more of a bet and having 98o or 9h8h makes it more of a c/f (same deal as before though, I think it would be pretty abnormal to face a player who doesn't auto bet 60% of pot when checked to on this flop).


2) With over 50% chance to somehow improve on the turn, and while having air currently, I would bet this 1000% with the intention of double barrelling one of the 20 cards that improves me not to mention the 8 cards that improve my range.

3) I think that vs a player who rarely bluffraises the flop, we're gonna be able to get away with c-betting pretty much all air here (yeah so what if he floats, we gain so much benefit from seeing the turn even with air that he doesn't exploit us significantly by floating imo).

That said, 22 33-77 are some of the few hands I will be c/fing. Mainly because I do it anyway, but its specifically good vs this player who seems to not bluff when shown weakness (see my above comment). He'll probably tend to check down his ace highs, making c/fing 44 here massively +ev compared to betting.

4) Betting of course, vs a player who would rather float than exploit relinquished initiative. C/r turn all in probably.

5) Vs someone who isn't bluff raising on dry boards ever, I think I'm gonna be betting all air until I detect adjustment on his part (i.e. he starts bluff raising, or if he gets to the point of floating 70-80% of cbets in 3-bet pots).