Assume that we are IPvsBB in a single-raised pot. My theory is that we can cbet range on every flop. Take J97tt BTNvsBB for example. This is one of the flops where cbetting range is most exploitable, so naturally we would not want to cbet range and instead approximate a GTO polarized cbetting strategy on this flop. I input my best conception of a GTO polarized cbetting strategy on this flop using the nodelocking feature in piosolver, and while the EV of my strategy was somewhat better than cbetting range (2.2% of pot lost vs 2.66% of pot lost), I'm not sure that this difference is significant enough to overcome the fact that cbetting polarized complicates turn strategy (have to worry about betting and checking ranges on turn, have to worry about lines like delayed cbet and facing turn probe).

Maybe this means that I need to get better at approximating GTO on flop, or perhaps cbetting range on flop doesn't actually simplify turn strategy. Either way, I think there can be some merit to cbetting range on every flop, since trying to approximate a GTO strategy that cbets less frequently may be unsuccessful. As humans, our approximations of GTO may be too far off of actual GTO, so we'd be better off just betting range on every flop and making up the EV on turn.