[Mathieu]

* grunch *

Keeping in mind that this is 0.10/0.20, you did not mention anything about how aggressive the table was, so I will assume LOOSE PASSIVE. I think your opponents could have wide range of hands here.

I am not sure if betting is better than checking, so here is my little analysis.

Arguments for betting: You may have the best hand vs 3 loose opponents and they will likely call with hands that you can beat such as a Tx, Kx, Jx. So betting has some value. It could also make the rest of the hand easier to play by making it HU vs a very LOOSE Passive opponent against which we could bet/fold this all the way. Not sure that this last reason is valid though.

Arguments for checking: It saves us money if we are behind. If we bet and get raised, we have pot odds to continue. So we would rather draw for less. Not so many free cards that can hurt us. Checking allows us to use the action to make better decision, if it goes bet/raise we can save money by folding.

* Against more opponents I would be more incline to check and against less I would be more inclined to bet. Here I would check.

Also, I am not sure if this reasoning is correct, but I would feel better about betting if I could fold and be done with the hand. But here I think I would have to call the raise, so I prefer checking to make it cheap.