Quote Originally Posted by JKDS
5 spades, great post. Have you tried applying it to a wider range of hands? Without actually doing the work, for flops were we hit our ace it still seems like the number of hands that beat us shrinks just as much as for a tight range, due to the affect of added hands like KT. If this is true, then fears of being outkicked might also be baseless against looser opponents. Thoughts?
Thoughts?

My thoughts are that I need to do many of those kinds of analyses on different kinds of flops to build more data points from which to draw conclusions as well as ingrain an intuitive understanding of the relationship between different kinds of hand ranges and different kinds of flops. And that everyone else reading this needs to do the same for themselves.

The goal of the thread is not to provide final answers, but to provide thought and guidance. When someone posts that he spent some time in study or that you should spend some time studying they're not talking about just reading an article or a book. It's this kind of thing. I'm saying that if you're not independently asking yourself these kinds of questions and working out the answers then you are not studying poker.

Robb's post from last year about how he worked out how he wanted to continuation bet once more reminded me of this. Everyone who read the post praised it. But very few of the praises indicated that people had taken the trouble work things out similarly for themselves and it's always true that those who do the puzzling out themselves get a deeper understanding than those who just read an article on the subject.

Never be afraid to go back to basics and never be afraid to share even though you think your thought process may be flawed. Through the act of sharing a thought process you rethink the whole thing and try to put it into a logical framework that will work for someone coming to it cold - and this juggling of concept is actually highly likely to improve your own fundamental understanding of even very basic things.