Quote Originally Posted by pdk1010
so i have been thinking alot about intangible aspects of the game. This post brings to mind something i have been thinking about alot . so in the example i actually think the range is too narrow than wide, being that micro stakes players(especially in tournaments) are playing pretty much any two cards(i know a generalization but experience is what it is). that being said let me get to my point, what happens if we factor in our table image to the example? If we having continuously been cbetting flops, etc, how valuable does a check really become on the turn? Im still trying to put a numeric value to this question but more than anything im just mulling it over in my brain because it seems to me at micro levels players are quick to attack perceived weakness from an aggressive player.....anyway just wanted to get a discussion started about the advantages of exploiting table image in regards to bet sizing, checking and so on especially in regards to an example such as this.....so whadya think?
This is mostly contradictory because having a table image implies there are people competent enough to notice it, which is usually not the case at the micros.

Also, I think the ranges in the example are too wide, but he's using them for a generic purpose so it's mostly okay. I think in real time, it can be extremely costly to have this wide of a range for most players. You are not going to lose as much money being too narrow as you are being too wide.