Been on a hiatus from poker - just logged in today and noted a PM from daven asking if his math corrections to my post were correct. I don't actually know, but thanks for taking the trouble. Also I'm not too concerned, because although the post is certainly better with accurate maths than without, getting the maths right isn't really the point of the post.

It's perfectly true that it can be summarised much more elegantly as daven himself did, but the point of the structured explanation was to introduce the framework of thought that with practice allows us to properly understand and apply the summary without losing any meaning.

Or to put it differently: "If we know loads about our opponent's tendencies we can easily exploit them." Yes - when we know what it means to know his tendencies and we know ways to exploit them. Anyone can agree with the statement on principle, but coming to it fresh it can be hard to understand what a tendency is, and how it can be exploited.

The intended audience of the post remains the freshest of beginners. I think it has value. It may well take several readings before it makes sense.