[Niediam]

I'm not good enough at MTTs to really contribute to if checking/leading is better but it seems to me that you could make good arguments for either which would atleast somewhat depend on your image and how your opponents have been playing. It definately doesn't appear to me that checking is hugely superior as Harrington suggests: 4 points for checking and 0 for betting any amount. There are several other similiar problems in the book where it seems Dan gives zero points for close decisions.