Too long, I know. To be honest there's probably more value in me writing it, than in anyone reading it. One of those pedagogical principles - that I understand and learn something better myself if I try to relay the point to someone else.

In truth the post is very very pedestrian to anyone except the most green of greenhornes (which includes me). I'm thinking about rewriting it as a more generic beginner guide to hand reading. Add in some useful section titles and break it up so it can be read in bits and so each bit makes sense.

What dawned on me while I was writing it is that when people do line checks on hands and someone comes in and says c/c, push or whatever, what could be useful would be if they also said which note they would make on the Hero or the Villain based on the hand history - particularly in the Beginner's Circle where people can be assumed to still be learning these things. Admittedly this is counter to the general principle of not posting the results to wean beginners off the idea that results are important.

I see two big weak points in the analysis. One is that I'm not sure what note (read) this should translate into. The other is that I'm not sure the initial ranges and the way they are reduced are accurate. The first one is kind of a critical problem if I want to turn this into a generic guide. The second really isn't critical, as the idea is to have the generic guide step through how a hand is analysed and turned into a read.

One of the main problems with my thinking and the line I took is that they were one-step only lines. I decided on the flop to bet - I didn't decide to bet/fold, bet/call or bet/raise. As played I should probably bet/call on the flop and bet/fold on the turn.