Quote Originally Posted by Tiresman
In the example step 4. Shouldn't the fraction be 11.5/(11.5+20)= 36.5% equity? Or am I doing something wrong?
Yes, fixed it. I caught this in my local copy of the OP but didn't fix it in the post. Thanks.

Quote Originally Posted by dontezuma
WHY is it inferior to include non-value hands in the analysis?
It's inefficient for a number of reasons. First, if it's a call with no bluffing hands in his range, then you've wasted time on an extra step. Second, if it's not a call unless there are bluffing hands in his range, you can quickly figure out how many hands he has to be bluffing with to find the break even point. Then you make a decision based on if you think he's bluffing more often than that or not. This avoids the difficult (and unnecessary) decision of deciding exactly how many combinations of starting cards (clicky) he's bluffing with.

Quote Originally Posted by dontezuma
It may well be inferior, but just stating it's so without backing it up with a reason doesn't get the conversation any further down the road.
Something to keep in mind is that every time someone provides you with helpful advice, it makes the games harder, which takes food directly off of the table of the person giving the advice.

Along that line of thought, a lot of things are left open-ended. While we're not going to intentionally give you bad advice, we're also going to hold your hand or spoon-feed you.