What does everyone think about the weak lead? Do you think it is the best option when you are first to act on the river with the nuts or a strong hand?

Lets say you have pocket Kings and you have been betting it the whole way. The flop is 2 6 10 K 3 rainbow. You put your opponet on the case king or a pair of jacks or higher. The blinds are .25/.5 NL. The pot is $20. You are heads up on the river. Do you feel a weak lead of $3 is the best play hoping your opponent will raise. Or would a check raise be better?

I personally like the weak lead better then the check raise because you risk your opponent checking behind you. I'd like to hear all your thoughts.

I like the idea of betting half the pot actually. If your bet is too weak, your opponent might smell something's up

I'd like to hear all your thoughts.

it's stupid unless you know your opponent can and is thinking on a higher level

exactly. The one that I remember most from Daniel's article on it was when hr pulled it on Huck Seed. The extra key is that Huck is a very aggressive player who will jump all over that kind of play so Daniel did some 5th level thinking by making that play. You need opponents who'll pay attewntion. Just like the delayed bluff that Thomas Kellar tralked about in one of his articles

I'm not using the weak lead or going for a check/raise in that situation, so I say neither. I bet about $12 in such a spot, though it might change given what the action was on previous streets.

Yea now that I think about it I usually would bet about half the pot. I was just wondering if the weak lead would extract more money. I'll try mixing my river play up with it and see how it goes from there.

Basically the only time i like to weak lead is when i have called a preflop raise from a tight player with a small pp, if i hit the set i weak lead into them hoping they come over the top huge to protect their big hand. Other than that I usually keep the weak lead play out of my game